Watch original video:

Among the disconcert of recent filings in the ongoing Vista Capable class action lawsuit is an abbreviated mention of one prompt witness who says Microsoft may have earned $1.505 billion without ceasing Windows XP licenses it sold on computers that were marked “Windows Vista Capable” limit not “Premium Ready.” It’s possibly the highest time a value despite the controversial program has been given publicly.

In each exhibit supporting Microsoft’s attempts to decertify the class and dismiss the case, Keith Leffler, a UW economics professor who is one of the plaintiffs’ expert witnesses, attempts to enjoin a prize on the program.

“I have been asked by means of Plaintiffs’ counsel to estimate the amount of revenue earned by the agency of Microsoft from the licensing of Windows XP on Vista Capable but not Vista Premium Ready PCs sold to Plaintiffs. In Microsoft’s Supplemental Responses, it estimates that it received revenue of [redacted] from Windows XP licenses installed on upgradeable PCs sold in the U.S. for the period of the April 2006 through January 2007 period. From the estimates of Windows Capable but not Vista Premium Ready PCs compared to all upgradeable PCs similar to in Table 1, I estimate that [redacted] of the [redacted] from Windows XP licenses attached upgradable PCs were in the place of XP licenses on Vista Capable but not Vista Premium Ready PCs - those PCs purchased by the Plaintiff class. From these figures, I have, therefore, reached the opinion that the Microsoft return from the Windows XP licensing on Vista Capable but not Vista Premium Ready PCs sold to Plaintiffs was $1.505 billion.”

This excerpt of Leffler’s report, freshly unsealed, appears to be offered as evidence supporting one lot of Microsoft’s argument on account of decertification of the class — that the plaintiffs have not presented a legal theory for how they were damaged that is legal by the court. From Microsoft’s motion to decertify:

“On Plaintiffs unjust enrichment claim, Dr. Leffler calculates sum of two units measures of disgorgement, one pegged to Microsoft’s gross income from Windows XP licenses and the other reflecting Microsoft’s royalty revenue on the Express Upgrade program. But, like expectation damages, disgorgement assumes that Microsoft obtained a benefit from Plaintiffs as a result of a deceptive act an inherently individual inquiry.”

Hat tip to Joe Tartakoff who spotted this earlier today.


Original text: http://blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com/techtracks/2009/01/04/expert_witness_estimates_microsoft_vista_capable_r.html