The legal dispute between ValueLicensing, a company engaged in reselling licensed software, and Microsoft is reaching a new level. An agreed court order was published requiring the latter to provide documents relating to the company’s former and current managers. Some of these could seriously complicate the situation of software developers as a result of disclosure, Report Register. We are specifically talking about the most important internal document called the “Second Hand Software Demonstration (SHS)”.
The order seeks and discloses Microsoft documents related to data that the software giant incentivized customers to transition to the service in exchange for abandoning attempts to resell software licenses previously purchased by such customers. Microsoft acknowledged the existence of the “second-hand software demo” in December 2025, although the document itself appeared in June 2013. SHS solves the problem of rolling out and migrating customers to “evergreen” Office 365 cloud subscriptions, as Microsoft has become an issue for many customers with perpetual licenses.
Although the contents of the SHS brief have not yet been fully disclosed, they are designated in the court order as so-called “SHS briefs.” Known adverse documents – documents that may contain information that is detrimental to one of the parties. The order gives Microsoft until October 31 to explain why it did not disclose the document earlier, as the original lawsuit against Microsoft was filed by ValueLicensing in 2021.
Photo credit: Benjamin Brunner/unsplash.com
Microsoft is now also required to conduct large-scale searches of enterprise mailboxes and SharePoint accounts related to material presentations using keywords such as “license,” “antitrust law,” and “value license.” The search period must cover July 3, 2012, to June 1, 2020. Documents found must be submitted by November 30th.
One of the executives whose mailbox and file storage came under court scrutiny is current Microsoft corporate vice president Richard Chin, who oversees the company’s monetization issues. In this role, he served as general manager, responsible for pricing, licensing and business models related to cloud and artificial intelligence. The list also includes Kevin Turner from 2005-2016. Serves as the company’s chief operating officer.
Regarding the confidentiality of the documents, the court ruled that the material in question would not be accorded general status and that confidentiality would be considered individually for each document and that restrictions would only apply to specific words, numbers or fragments. The defendant must support the suppression with specific reasons rather than general accusations.
Photo credit: Erwin Bosman/unsplash.com
Any additional documents discovered that relate to the same or similar issues raised in the SHS briefing must be disclosed by November 30, 2026. Additionally, Microsoft will be required to notify ValueLicensing every 21 days of its progress in meeting the requirements. Microsoft did not comment on the news, but a representative for ValueLicensing said the company has been seeking proper document disclosure for years and the court order is the result of its hard work and the recent disclosure of other documents. In addition, this can also give us a better understanding of Microsoft’s attitude towards the second-hand software market.
The case has taken several twists and turns in recent years, including Microsoft’s attempt to shift the lawsuit toward copyright issues rather than respond to accusations that it intentionally hindered license resale. The new shift could shed light on how the company views the market during a period when it’s heavily encouraging customers to switch to subscriptions.
2025 UK Competition Appeal Tribunal (CAT) Decide In response to ValueLicensing’s claim that the resale and “fragmentation” of local software licenses does not infringe Microsoft’s copyright, further litigation will only multiply the giant’s problems. As a result, in July there was news that the company escape £270 million to be paid to ValueLicensing. The amount is already large, but a class action lawsuit has been launched at the same time. If it wins, Microsoft may have lost. Billions.
source:
