Not surprisingly, Muglia, who is currently senior vice president in charge of applications and tools at Microsoft, testified that Sun had given Microsoft the right to extend Sun's Java Virtual Machine and language to create versions unique to Windows.
A RealVideo report from day one of the Java court battle.
Much of Muglia's time on the stand in Judge Ronald Whyte's courtroom was spent going over the months and days that led to the signing of the contract on March 12, 1996.
No lack of communication
Muglia referred often to two face-to-face meetings and frequent conference calls held prior to the marathon 20-hour session that led to the March 12 signing, the same day Microsoft was to host thousands of developers at its Professional Developers Conference to detail its Internet strategy.
As part of his statements, Muglia referred to a confidential e-mail between a Microsoft executive and Sun's Bill Joy. The Dec 6, 1996, e-mail appears to have given Microsoft some level of flexibility regarding its use of Java with Windows. That e-mail is currently under seal. It was dated the day before Microsoft signed a letter of intent to license Java.
A year before, Microsoft had been developing its own version and implementation of Java in-house.
According to Muglia, multiple drafts of the contract were exchanged by the two parties during negotiations in February and March of 1996.
During those negotiations, Muglia said Microsoft believed Sun, of Mountain View, Calif., granted it the right to extend Java, the VM and Microsoft's compiler as well as the right to create tools that enable developers to build both Windows-based Java applications and cross-platform applications using a "mode switch."
Muglia said that as part of the agreement by Sun to allow Microsoft to have control over native interfaces, Microsoft agreed to allow Sun to be the sole third-party distributor of the Microsoft Java VM.
Under cross-examination by Sun's attorney Lloyd Day, of the firm Day, Caebeer, Madrid, Winters & Batchelder, Muglia agreed that all previous communication and draft contracts, and any implied agreements, are moot given the existence of the contract, called the Technical Distribution License Agreement.
"A deal is a deal," Muglia said at one point.
A little confusion
Muglia also agreed with Day's contention that the purpose of the TDLA was to prevent confusion or ambiguities such as those being contested today.
Day also questioned Muglia about a PC Week article dated Nov. 25, 1996, that mentioned Microsoft's attempts to split Java.
He further questioned Muglia about Microsoft's subsequent press release that refuted the story and stated the Redmond, Wash., company's commitment to support cross-platform Java.
The hearing is to resume this afternoon, while a formal hearing on Sun's request for a preliminary injunction against Windows 98 and Visual J++ is scheduled for Thursday.
The hearing is closed to the public.