Bringing Down a Giant: Elysium Tackles Microsoft

Litigation Timeline

1

Summary

In 1998, the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) brought an antitrust case against Microsoft alleging that, by bundling its Windows 98 operating system (OS) with its Internet Explorer (IE) web browser, Microsoft engaged in anti-competitive conduct designed to maintain its OS monopoly and increase its web browser market.

The issue at the heart of the case was whether Microsoft's Windows 98 and IE were inseparable. The DOJ turned to Elysium Digital (Elysium) to provide technical expertise in proving that Windows 98 and IE could be separated. Elysium worked on the case with Princeton Professor Edward Felten (the DOJ's lead computer science expert witness) and attorney David Boies (the DOJ's lead trial counsel).

Elysium proved that Windows 98 and IE could indeed operate independently. In addition, during trial, Elysium demonstrated that flaws in Microsoft videos were misleading to the court. The trial concluded with a finding that Microsoft had abused its monopoly power. When David Boies described Elysium's work, he said, "The results have been just incredible."

1

2

3

3 Discovery

The DOJ hired Elysium to prove that IE and Windows 98 could be separated. Elysium worked with Professor Edward Felten, the DOJ's lead computer science expert witness. Elysium, led by Peter Creath and Christian Hicks, cut through the layers in Microsoft's software that had effectively camouflaged IE as a function of Windows 98 and got to the core of the interaction between the OS and the browser. (Notably, they were able to solve this problem without the Windows 98 source code.) After extensive observation and debugging, Elysium and Professor Felten wrote software that disabled IE while leaving the non-browser functionality of Windows 98 fully operational, thereby demonstrating that the operating system could run without IE.

4

4 Trial

Elysium remained on-site during trial to offer ongoing technical expertise. During trial, Microsoft contended that parts of Windows 98 ran up to three times slower after running Elysium’s program to remove Internet Explorer. If true, this would have supported their argument that IE was an essential feature of the OS. The initial removal software, written before Elysium had access to Windows source code, did produce a slight slowdown effect, but later versions were optimized to the Windows 98 code. Microsoft SVP of Windows Development James Allchin sought to illustrate the slowdown in a video exhibit. After Elysium observed technical discrepancies in the video, questions from David Boies forced Allchin to admit that the purported time-lapse video was likely pieced together from multiple sources. Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson stated that Allchin's concession cast doubt on the entire reliability of Microsoft's video demonstration. Judge Jackson offered Allchin the opportunity to re-create the exhibit in Elysium's presence. However, Microsoft was not able to re-create the slowdown effect. Elysium's findings were ultimately conceded by Microsoft and the trial concluded with a finding that Microsoft had indeed abused its monopoly power.

5

Related Staff

Christian B. Hicks

External Testifying Expert

Testifying Expert
Edward W. Felten, Ph.D.

External Testifying Expert

Testifying Expert

U.S. v. Microsoft Corporation

Bringing Down a Giant: Elysium Tackles Microsoft

Litigation Timeline

Pre-litigation

Beginning of Litigation

Discovery

Trial

Post-verdict

Related Staff