ValueLicensing tries to smack down Microsoft defenses in license reselling spat
- Reference: 1702974132
- News link: https://www.theregister.co.uk/2023/12/19/valuelicensing_files_a_summary_judgment/
- Source link:
ValueLicensing is suing Microsoft for £270 million ($342 million) in damages for alleged anticompetitive behavior and abuse of dominance. Specifically, it claims Microsoft choked off the supply of pre-owned perpetual licenses by allegedly offering customers discounts on subscriptions in return for not selling on these perpetual licenses.
The reseller alleges that the "net result has been higher prices and less choice for customers, who have been steered into cloud-based Office365 and Azure subscriptions."
[1]
Microsoft denies suppressing competition or abusing its dominance but also put forward [2]two alternative defenses : first, asserting that the contractual terms in question were necessary and reasonable, and second, a claim that the benefits provided by its alleged moves outweighed anything anticompetitive.
[3]
[4]
ValueLicensing is trying to get the CAT to strike out those parts of Microsoft's defense.
In its filing, the reseller argues that these specific defenses have "no real prospect of success," claiming Microsoft hasn't properly explained why they should apply.
[5]
The software reseller is also seeking for the CAT to make an order striking down Microsoft's desire to plead foreign law, arguing that its claim is governed by English law until December 31, 2020, and the advent of Brexit. Damage after Brexit is up to the law of the country of the market concerned.
Jonathan Horley, founder and managing director of ValueLicensing, said: "Microsoft has had ample time and opportunity to come forward with the specific factual information required to underpin its objective justification defense, its efficiency defense, and its case on foreign law."
The application for summary judgment – by the full Tribunal – could be determined between March and June 2024. The trial is set for 2025.
[6]UK reseller sues Microsoft for £270m in damages claiming prohibitive contracts choke off surplus Office licence supplies
[7]Microsoft doles out Office Long Term Servicing Channel for cloud refuseniks
[8]Microsoft broke British and European competition laws, UK reseller tells High Court
[9]Microsoft renews cloud contracts with UK.gov amid ongoing legal spat with on-prem licence reseller
A Microsoft spokesperson told The Register : "ValueLicensing's core complaint is that we gave customers the option to apply the value of their licenses for older products to new cloud subscriptions rather than selling them to third parties. We believe that was both legal and the right thing to do. Helping our customers move to the cloud improves productivity and security."
The case was [10]initially filed in the UK's High Court in April 2021 before being transferred to the CAT in November 2022. It has ground on ever since, with Microsoft [11]recently objecting to including Horley in the "confidentiality ring" – a group of people permitted to view confidential information pertaining to the case. ®
Get our [12]Tech Resources
[1] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=2&c=2ZYF313@9QQDde10zCjwHTwAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D2%26raptor%3Dcondor%26pos%3Dtop%26test%3D0
[2] https://www.valuelicensing.com/en/blog/parr-uk-microsoft-damages-valuelicensing-seeks-cat-order-striking-out-microsoft-s-amended-defences/
[3] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZYF313@9QQDde10zCjwHTwAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[4] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=3&c=33ZYF313@9QQDde10zCjwHTwAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D3%26raptor%3Deagle%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[5] https://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/jump?co=1&iu=/6978/reg_software/front&sz=300x50%7C300x100%7C300x250%7C300x251%7C300x252%7C300x600%7C300x601&tile=4&c=44ZYF313@9QQDde10zCjwHTwAAAFY&t=ct%3Dns%26unitnum%3D4%26raptor%3Dfalcon%26pos%3Dmid%26test%3D0
[6] https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/08/valuelicensing_microsoft_lawsuit/
[7] https://www.theregister.com/2021/09/17/office_ltsc/
[8] https://www.theregister.com/2021/07/12/valuelicensing_microsoft_competition_lawsuit_270m/
[9] https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/21/microsoft_gov_mou/
[10] https://www.theregister.com/2021/04/08/valuelicensing_microsoft_lawsuit/
[11] https://www.theregister.com/2023/10/10/microsoft_valuelicensing_update/
[12] https://whitepapers.theregister.com/
Re: Mugs
"...Why, in 2023, is anyone still paying for software -- let alone putting up with stupid vendor-imposed limits on what they are allowed to do with it?
Everything you need is already available, for no cost; and with permission not only to make as many copies as you like, but to alter it as you think fit..."
Sorry, but this is such an oversimplified view of the world.
For an individual , then sure - there is almost always something available.
However, for a corporation , free to use is rarely free to deploy, manage, or support. On top of that, they will usually be using something that is industry-standard. And you want that company to be around in a few years' time as well (especially where it's business-critical).
There is a perfectly usable, free, alternative to Microsoft Office, that people can get along with fine at home* but there's also reasons why it's never kicked MS's dominance out in the corporate world: the rest of said corporate world already use it and you want compatibility with what they're sending over/you're sending over. There are untold numbers of plugins and add-ons that are in use by some of the other huge corporate vendors, etc etc.
And finally not everyone has the skills - or even the desire - to alter software.
And of course - by paying, you have someone you can hold to the fire when things go wrong, as well as someone to shout at. When that someone is an individual doing it in their spare time, you lose that ability. Again that may not mean a lot at home, but it means something in business.
*Yes I know some businesses use it - that wasn't really the point I was making though. It's largely horses for courses but free to procure rarely equates to free to support/use in business.
Re: Mugs
Free software ...
"Oh, my £100m company has an issue with it's free software that throws an error, I'll just phone the free support line and get then to raise the issue with the obviously free developer."
I see nothing wrong with that as a completely sustainable system of "slaveryware" - or perhaps you'd prefer to throw them a half-gnawed bone occasionally and only call it "serfdomware"?
Mugs
Why, in 2023, is anyone still paying for software -- let alone putting up with stupid vendor-imposed limits on what they are allowed to do with it?
Everything you need is already available, for no cost; and with permission not only to make as many copies as you like, but to alter it as you think fit.