This site
Essentials
Spec Issues
Other languages
Resources
Copyright (c) the respective authors. Licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution Share Alike 3.0 License.
See here for the news:
http://vuorio.blogspot.com/2007/08/idg-microsoft-forced-partners-to-vote.html
http://www.idg.se/2.1085/1.118337
Waiting for a swede the translate the IDG article…
OS2world has more infos:
http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14871/2/
Microsoft forced partners to vote Yes!
Vote Yes to Open XXML and we'll make sure that you get extra marketing money for you campaigns; this is Microsoft's Sweden's own words when they rounded up their Gold Partners in Sweden. Klas Hammar, Microsoft Sweden now regrets the formulation and regrets that the e-mail was sent out.
Swedish newspaper, Computer Sweden, now confirms that Microsoft did send out e-mails to get Gold Partners to get them to vote via one of the Gold Partners that received the e-mail and phone calls from Microsoft.
According to the e-mail that Microsoft sent out and only to few partners, at least that is what Microsoft claims, Gold Partners expect to participate at the meeting with SIS (Swedish Standards Institute) and "to vote yes to Open XML". The partner companies are also asked to participate to a number of meetings after the vote to "show good will".
For the partners that doesn't think that they have right knowledge and/or understanding regarding Open XML Microsoft then also offers arguments why the choose to vote yes - "[Partner company] doesn't need to discus the technical content of the specification but must be prepered to give a few arguements why the voted yes - those will be given by Microsoft", says Microsoft.
The 2500 USD fee to SIS is something that the partner company had to pay by themself, but Microsoft then promise "marketing contribution" and "extra support in the form av Microsoft resources" to those companies that participates in the vote.
Klas Hammar, Business Manager at Microsoft Sweden claims that the e-mail that they sent out was badly formulated and that he has withdrawn the information. He also claims that Microsoft wouldn't even think about trying to buying votes or as he says "that it would be crazy to think that we did". But he does admit that they have encourage their partners to be part of the final vote…
Klas Hammar, Microsoft Sweden now regrets the formulation and regrets that the e-mail was sent out.
I bet he does. I also think that we now have a smoking gun.
was badly formulated and that he has withdrawn the information.
Sorry, you can't do that. You can't unshit your bed, so to speak. Information can not be withdrawn, it's already out there. Promises can be withdrawn, but doing so after people have acted on the information is fraud. The statement itself looks to me as if it encourages
partners to fraudulent behavior. No matter how you turn, Microsoft Sweden made a boo-boo. They agree to having made the statement, so all they can do now is prepare to face the consequences.
SIS have been informed of this unexpected turn of events. We'll see what happens.
Anonymous (62.58.36.x) 29 Aug 2007 15:14
Clearly on this site already there was someone quoted from the FFII that said they were gathering people to countervote whatever MS votes would join the committee. They already had gathered a group of 8 to vote against OOXML
That is the same thing.
Only they seemed to be taken by surprise by the sheer number of last minute new members withheld them from this.
Anonymous (62.58.36.x), 29 Aug 2007 15:14
"They already had gathered a group of 8 to vote against OOXML"
Can you list them?
Maybe that was 80 of them?
The thing is you have methods to see if an argument is wrong or right. Just doing committee stuffing is not helping in this case.
That is the same thing.
No, it's not. Although I do not think it is quite right to "fight fire with fire" when dirty tricks are involved, it does make a big difference who starts the stuffing, whether the plans are open or covert, and whether the aim is to artificially outnumber the opposition and smother it or to balance the playing field so that the comments from the NB will be considered. It also matters very much whether bribes and undue pressure are involved. Surely even you must see the difference? To say that what FFII did (or tried to do) is "the same thing" is clearly a very, very simplified view. It is the same action, but for entirely different reasons, and reasons matter. While I do not think it was wise of FFII to resort to such plans, I do see a clear difference between acts of aggression and the measures people decide to take to counteract them.
"You stole my money, you thief!"
"Oh yeah? Well, you tried to steal it back from me, so you are just as bad. Stop whining."
I think FFII should actually not have made plans to "counter-stuff" the committee, but even so I think they stayed clearly on the right side of the line in their plans for action (note that action was never actually taken, just considered). However, I think Microsoft stepped way past that line and ventured into a dark and ugly place where I do not wish to follow them. We should instead call attention to where they are standing, and hope that people take notice.
Microsoft wouldn't even think about trying to buying votes or as he says "that it would be crazy to think that we did"
In fact, he is quite right, taken literally. It would be crazy to think that they were trying to buy votes. They obviously succeeded in buying votes. We would be crazy not to see that. Good point, Mr. Hammar!
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070829070630660
Microsoft Memo to Partners in Sweden Surfaces: Vote Yes for OOXML
I mean where is the news? Wasn't Norway the same? What "smoking gun"? It smells all over the place.
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070827111019189
Btw: A "NO" means disapproval with comments, so the standard can get improved. A "YES" means approval and ignore all the bugs. As it is a negotiations process it is very important that comments get tabled. Comments are bug reports.
The incidents clearly demonstrate that a single company is behind that "standard" push. Microsoft did not respond to all the open questions such as the validity of the patent indemnification model in continental law or how they intend to improve the specification. They think they can get away with it and cash will heal a broken specification.
What "smoking gun"? It smells all over the place.
The "smoking gun" is the actual leaked memo and the statements following it. Until now, the intentional stuffing of committees was apparent but not proven beyond doubt. Yes, it has smelled all over the place for quite some time, but until now we had trouble finding a rotten fish to point to, it was just that rancid smell. Microsoft kept pretending that their partners made those votes on their own accord, and we had no hard evidence to prove them wrong. Now their intent and covert action is no longer a case of debate, they were actually caught red-handed. Microsoft Sweden publicly admits to having sent out a memo to coerce partners into voting "yes" for reasons dictated by Microsoft, and they offered monetary equivalents to partners doing as they were told. That is solid proof, and even though I am not sure they actually broke any law (IANAL), it certainly changes the debate from now on.
Anonymous (86.84.111.x) 29 Aug 2007 20:39
Microsoft kept pretending that their partners made those votes on their own accord
That seems factually incorrect. They certainly confirmed that they had spoken to their partners on this and suggested them to join.
I read the following in an other thread here on the site:
- Is Microsoft behind this?
We've had continuous dialogue with our partners regarding what's
happening in various standardization phases, says Anita Arkéus-Åsheden,
platform manager at Microsoft.
- Did Microsoft ask its partners to join the SSI group?
Like those who oppose the standard and who spoke with their partners, we
of course did the same.
- So they joined based on Microsoft's initiative?
We held dialogues with some as to whether they'd get involved.
- Did they ask you for advice about joining?
We said that it would be good if they chose to go there and express their
views, says Arkéus-Åsheden.
Anonymous (86.84.111.x), 29 Aug 2007 20:39
Microsoft kept pretending that their partners made those votes on their own accord
Here, I was not referring to Sweden, but to Microsoft's responses to similar "coincidences" in other countries. They have said things to the effect of "we have no say in what our partners choose to do, but of course we are happy to see them support our noble cause". They never admitted to having a direct influence. This is what suddenly changed with the leaked memo.
The article at the top of this thread is about that leaked memo. What you quoted above is a newspaper article from "Ny Teknik", and it's an interview with a Microsoft spokesperson. This interview took place some time after Klas Hammar stuck his foot in his mouth in public. I bet that he will not be making any further statements, and that the damage control people have now taken over to bend the truth and try to cover up what was actually done.
The leaked memo is real. Klas Hammar admitted to it, and he is not some small fry who can be discredited as a grunt who acted on his own without knowing better and should be ignored, he is (or was, let's see how long he lasts) Business Manager of Microsoft Sweden, and that memo had the very clear and direct effect of 20 Microsoft partners joining the committee to vote "yes". There is simply no way of denying that.
The memo speaks very clearly of what Microsoft told its partners to do, not asked. It was very clearly not their own independent decision to join, nor was it their own choice to vote "yes". They were "expected" to join, told to "vote yes", and offered a bribe to do it. It was not a "dialogue", it was not "their views", and it was not they who "chose" to join. Quite a few subtle bends to the truth can be spotted already the day after the fact. They are really trying hard to cover this up.
Now this translation is slightly "fast n dirty" — but I believe pretty accurate.
I am not sure about the "fair use" issue in translating an article, but if IDG/CS have any problems with it they're free to protest.
By Daniel Goldberg
Society: Microsoft offered extra market-subsidies to partners that participated in yesterdays vote on the Open XML-format. That can be concluded from internal email that CS has seen. “It was badly formulated and should never have been sent out”, the Microsoft area manager Klas Hammar said.
Day before yesterday the Swedish Institute of Standards, SIS, voted yes to the Microsoft-format Office Open XML. That happened after a large body of Swedish corporations joined the vote at the last moment, and by that ensured a victory for Microsoft.
Microsoft put some real pressure on their partners to vote yes. That is apparent from communication between Swedish Microsoft and their partners, which CS got our hands on.
In an information email that, according to Microsoft was sent out to “a few” partner-corporations, the software giant writes that partners “are expected” to register their participation to SIS and “come to the meeting on 8/27 and vote yes to Open XML”.
The partners were also asked to participate in at least one meeting after the vote, to show “their good participant status”.
For those partners who felt less than fully cognizant in the matter, Microsoft also offered ready-made arguments why Office Open XML should be accepted by SIS.
”[The partners] won’t have to discuss the technical body of the specification, but must be prepared to give a few arguments to why they vote yes – those will be forwarded to you by Microsoft,” the company writes.
The participation fee 15000 SEK (note: approx. equivalent to $2,5k) the partners will have to cover themselves, but in exchange the company promises “market-subsidies” and “extra support in the form of Microsoft resources” to the corporations that register and participate in the vote.
Klas Hammar, area manager for Microsoft with responsibility for Office among other things, regrets the “bad formulations” in the email. He says that Microsoft have contacted the partners that have received the mail and retracted the information.
– It was badly formulated and should never have been sent out. We don’t buy yes-votes. It would be crazy to believe we do, says Klas Hammar.
But that Microsoft have encouraged their partners to participate in the vote he won’t deny.
– Of course we talk to our partners about these issues. It is tragic that things turned out like they did. But the fact remains that we’ve done something our customers asked us to do, he says.
At the same time it is clear that the other side have worked hard too, getting their agenda through in the debate. A number of large corporations, with a vested interest in seeing the Microsoft format fail, have strong ties to the lobby-organization FFII, the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure, that have worked the campaign for the no-side in the document format issue.
On the site nooxml.org, that is run by FFII, corporations and organizations are encouraged to contact their local standard organizations to prevent that Office Open XML is accepted as a standard. FFII have strong ties to both Sun, IBM and Red Hat, that are all set against the Microsoft document format.
Jonas Bosson, chairman for the swedish FFII, confirms that the organization have cooperated with Sun while lobbying in the EU and have gotten help from IBM to arrange conferences and PR. The corporation Red Hat are one of the prime financers behind FFIIs international activities.
– But the Swedish section has no economy whatsoever. I do this as a private person and all things we do we finance privately, says Jonas Bosson.
Anonymous (62.58.36.x) 30 Aug 2007 08:42
Micrsoft states the surfaced email was only sent to two partners and those partners were phoned to disregard the email.
http://blogs.msdn.com/jasonmatusow/archive/2007/08/29/open-xml-the-vote-in-sweden.aspx
Also Micrsoft stated that they pro-activly notified SIS of this happening.
Anonymous (62.58.36.x), 30 Aug 2007 08:42
If this is true, then why didn't the original interview with Klas Hammar reveal this information? Why didn't he say right from the start that he sent this memo only to two partners and that he immediately called them to say that it should be ignored, because he violated company policy by sending it out? It would have seriously lessened the impact of the blow if he had done so.
I know, people act stupid under stress and journalists are not always as unbiased as one would wish for, but this is clearly a case of Klas Hammar's brain going missing altogether, or the journalist obviously putting a spin to the story. Or, there could still be more behind this than what Microsoft admits.
In any case, Microsoft is blaming Klas Hammar personally, as expected, and he takes the hit. Whether that is right or not is something we will never know for sure, but it does sound reasonable. It was a little too good to be true that Microsoft as a company would have made such an extremely bad move. They are not that stupid, not even in the national subsidiary in little Sweden.
EDIT: Klas Hammar's name is not mentioned in the American press releases. It might be somebody else at Microsoft Sweden who takes the bullet, I do not know for a fact that it is Klas Hammar personally. Sorry for my jumping to that conclusion.
Anonymous (62.58.36.x) 30 Aug 2007 12:01
If this is true, then why didn't the original interview with Klas Hammar reveal this information?
Mayby it did but was it not very interesting to publish. As you haven't got a transscript of what Klas Hammer said it is hard to know what he or anyone else contacted at Micrsoft actually said.
In any case, Microsoft is blaming Klas Hammar personally
I do not see that anywhere. The email could be send by just about anyone working at the Swedish MS Office. Allthough Klas Hammer as business might be responsible for all of them !?
Anonymous (62.58.36.x), 30 Aug 2007 12:01
Ms Austria even accused us of fakin' the story.
I hope you saved all communication in that matter. More embarrassment for Microsoft.
Anonymous (213.113.219.x) 30 Aug 2007 21:14
Well, I know for a fact that more than two companies received emails like this here in Sweden, so this Matusow-figure just make things up. Sweden is a small country and everybody in the IT-business knows each other ;) This Jason Matusow is obviously not from Sweden and isn't aware of these facts so he probably do not know what a big mistake he makes when he goes out with an absolute number of companies that received this memo, that only prove that Microsoft is trying to make this issue as small as possible and take a number that is as small as possible, Klas Hammar, the Swedish business area manager, has already revealed that it was "a few companies" so Matusow couldn't say just one company ;) so it seams like most people at Microsoft have hard times to telling the truth at the moment, so why should we bereave anything they say?
Anonymous (213.113.219.x), 30 Aug 2007 21:14
Anonymous (86.84.111.x) 30 Aug 2007 22:13
Well, I know for a fact that more than two companies received emails like this here in Sweden
You know this how ???
so why should we beleave anything they say
As he is a director within Microsoft with the autority to make official Microsoft staments about that kind of issues and you are….
Anonymous (86.84.111.x), 30 Aug 2007 22:13
Anonymous (86.84.111.x) 31 Aug 2007 07:01
http://www.os2world.com/content/view/14874/2/
Micrsoft loses when vote is declared invalid as there delegation vote twice in ballot which they won 25-6-4
Anonymous (86.84.111.x), 31 Aug 2007 07:01
Well, I know for a fact that more than two companies received emails like this here in Sweden
Emails "similar to this" or "exactly like this"? Can you see a send-list or otherwise give us an indication of how many "more than two" might be? Would you be willing to disclose some more information? This would be very useful in countering Matusow and call out his lie, and it would be useful also as evidence in the EU antitrust case which is reopened in November.
It would be very interesting indeed to hear what you have to say in this matter, on or off the record. I am Swedish, not affiliated with any businesses or organizations with an interest in this matter, but clearly favoring a "no" vote on my own accord. Please drop me a message on moc.liamg|nosvatsug.nafets#moc.liamg|nosvatsug.nafets if you want to talk. I will not quote private mail conversations in public.
