Novell Inc and X/Open Co Ltd, which have been demanding that Microsoft Corp drop its requirement that Unix for iAPX-86 machines must run Xenix applications, may be backing down in face of Microsoft’s intransigence. Novell says if X/Open can wrangle such a concession out of Microsoft. that is fine, but Novell will not agree to sign the new royalties deal Microsoft wants in return for Microsoft dropping its demand that it use of the obsolete applications suite. Caught in the middle, X/Open is prepared simply to live with the old requirement for anything it certifies as Unix for iAPX-86 boxes. X/Open executives said last week that they are asking Microsoft for a set of the required applications and will provide them to third parties for a handling fee. A number of substantive points remain unclear, including how long the Unix industry has not been meeting the contractual requirement; whether all the Unix-on-iAPX-86 software currently on the market can still meet the Xenix specification; and what kind of fall-out will ensue if they cannot. At press time nobody seemed to know the answers to these questions, but already there was speculation in some quarters that someone somewhere would figure out a way to avoid the Microsoft taxes. X/Open is desperate to avoid any further delays to its Unix branding programme and is adamant that a UniForum love-in for the first crop of successfully tested Unixes is still scheduled. Novell is upset that the issue has became public, not just because the Xenix royalties it has to pay Microsoft have been a secret from the rest of the industry, but because it would just have preferred to avoid the glare of publicity over the issue. Sources said Novell’s chief attorney David Bradford posted a letter to Microsoft last week swearing that Novell had not leaked the request to drop the Xenix applications requirement to the press. He insisted Novell has scrupulously complied with the non-disclosure clause in the Xenix royalties contract. Novell was also reported to be pressuring X/Open to adopt a similar stance and to refuse public comment. It muzzled its own executives, sending out a memo containing a brief six-sentence statement that was supposed to be all they could say.
In perpetuity
In the memo Novell said it was content with the agreement, originally made between Microsoft and AT&T Corp. Novell has maintained full compliance with the Agreement with Microsoft since it was signed and intends to continue to meet its terms. Therefore, regarding this Agreement, there is nothing to reaffirm, it said. Sources inside Novell last week went a little further than their instructions and claimed that Novell did not want to sign a new royalty deal out of fear Microsoft really wanted a commitment in perpetuity which would mean that even if Xenix was to die you would still have to pay Microsoft. The original 1988 AT&T agreement, which became binding on Novell when it acquired Unix last year, saw Microsoft drop its Xenix product line in return for the compatibility suite pledge plus royalties said to be slightly more than $10 a copy. The issue of dropping the Xenix applications suite and substituting a binary compatibility standard instead arose when Novell made X/Open responsible for Unix branding, osten sibly to unify the fractured Unix world around a single standard. According to sources present at the time, X/Open spotted the requirement then and was not happy with it. Novell in turn asked Microsoft to drop it, but that request has apparently not been repeated. But X/Open seconded the request, escalating the issue from private talks between Microsoft and Novell to a public event. Microsoft agreed to drop the Xenix suite requirement if Novell would sign a new deal reaffirming that it owes royalties for Unix on iAPX-86, a step Novell clearly does not want to take. Its refusal has been more than a minor embarrassment to X/Open. It makes the idea of unified Unix look shaky and makes it clear that even with its X/Open’s new branding powers, Novell is still calling the shots. A side issue has also arisen over
the royalties due on SunSoft Inc’s Solaris x86. Microsoft says it is owed royalties from Novell on SunSoft’s sales of the operating system. A source with access to the contract between Sun and Novell, drawn up when Sun bought out its Unix revenue stream from Novell back in March, said it includes a clause making Sun liable for the Xenix royalties due Microsoft. Novell’s current attitude seems to be that Sun should send cheques directly to Microsoft while Microsoft feels the cheques should come from Novell. Sources last week indicated there was worry that Sun may try to use the controversy to find a way not to pay its Microsoft taxes and leave Novell holding the bag. The issue of who actually writes the cheques sounds kind of silly until one considers the personalities involved. No one is willing to say whether Sun has ever actually sent Microsoft any money, although a source inside Microsoft, trying to remain equivocal, said I do not think so. If true, that ought to stir things up some.
