We are daily exposed to the carefully staged intimacies of celebrities. We visit their homes via television. We attend their parties and tax-deductible fits of charitability through the pages of slick magazines. We witness their brief appearances, rare witticisms and bar-room spats with the help of newspapers’ three-dot columnists. Sometimes these stories of the stars are amusing, nearly always they are harmless. But we get accustomed to them pretty quickly, as we do with odours, noise and faster computers. Until recently, that is. The best-seller list boasts an undeniably seamy portrait of a president and his wife. Mrs R used to be called the first lady, but now we’re not so sure, what with the implications about crooning, spooning and all. At the least, the bony biographee could have rushed to the defence of her favourite performer. Like other artists, Old Blue Eyes has been known to exhibit rash and temperamental behaviour, but he had never before been accused of a complete lack of taste in matters so personal. This story seems wholesome compared with the disturbing events and scurrilous reporting of a recent night in Palm Beach.

Raped

A woman says she was raped at the Kennedy mansion. Shortly afterward, she was assaulted by the press, which disclosed her identity in a cruel contest for shock value. At the time, no charges had been filed against any of the usual suspects; they’ll cross that bridge when they come to it. Can there be more of these high jinks? Yes. The darkest secrets of computer leasing will soon be illuminated in court. IBM Credit Corp has instigated legal proceedings that will necessitate the exposure of hitherto private computer deals. Several users’ names have already been bandied about in IBM Credit’s complaints. The details of their arrangements with lessor Comdisco Inc, memory maker EMC Corp and vendor IBM are on their way to a public forum. The only path back to privacy is out-of-court settlement, almost inconceivable in the Comdisco affair and unlikely in the EMC case. This was the route chosen by Cambex Corp, not out of concern for discretion but rather as the business decision it deemed most practical under the circumstances. It would be foolish to assume that the only transactions to be reviewed during the course of IBM Credit’s legal onslaught will be those already sketched in the complaints. The defences mounted by Comdisco and EMC cannot proceed without the testimony of yet-unnamed lessees. Some of these companies will be clients of the defendants, while others will be customers of IBM Credit or other lessors. The trail of numerous business activities will be mapped out during the process of discovery and these deals will become grist for the litigators’ mills. The public displays of disaffection aren’t confined to the hallowed halls of justice. The independent lessors’ trade association decided to appeal to its interested public. So has IBM Credit. So, individually, have a number of lessors and computer dealers. All the players have prepared partisan but informative presentations aimed at their clientele, who are still interested but may soon grow bored. This isn’t the first time in computer industry history IBM has gotten entangled in an open brawl. Disputes between plug-compatible manufacturers and IBM led to antitrust suits a couple of decades ago and culminated in a complaint filed by the Justice Department.

By Hesh Wiener

The IBMulators had a trade group, Computer Industry Association, which added its weight to that of the plaintiffs. In the end, IBM was victorious and the plugs as well as the government were vanquished. There is a crucial distinction between then and now. During the PCM wars, IBM was the defendant, not the plaintiff as it is today. IBM Credit is clearly an aggrieved party. So, too, are the independent lessors and memory makers whose behaviour has been challenged by IBM. Still, despite their discomfort, we doubt that any of the lessors would have instituted a suit against IBM. There has been acrimony in the leasing business before, and it was always handled wi

thout litigation. Until IBM sued we would have guessed (with great confidence and, as events turned out, wrongly) that the settlement process would occur in a closed meeting. Even when fighting words were spoken, we believed that some diplomatic soul would turn up to catalyse a negotiated settlement. Perhaps the judgement of IBM’s executives was coloured by the tenor of the times. After all, America was on a war footing. IBM’s lawyers felt that the company had a strong if not perfect case, making victory appear overwhelmingly likely. Wrongful conduct akin to that alleged in IBM’s complaints had cost Big Blue a few bucks when lessor Continental Information Systems Inc went bankrupt, so there was no question that some of IBM Credit’s assets were at risk. From within IBM, it must have appeared as if patience and tolerance would only engender serious abuse on the part of competitors. However, this picture is not complete, nor does it have the most wise perspective. The full cost to IBM of litigation cannot be found in its lawyers’ bills any more than the price of inaction could be determined by the potential for material loss. The real price that IBM, independent lessors and particularly their customers may pay will be very hard to measure. The relationship of IBM and all lessors to their customers is in the balance. The users affected by the conflict won’t be limited to those whose names appear in trial transcripts and evidential exhibits. Every company, lessee or not, whose assets include substantial amounts of IBM equipment will be caught up in this mess… and its aftermath.

Iron-clad

Companies that depend on IBM should keep an eye on the court cases. A decisive victory by IBM or its adversaries will bring about change in the way computer leasing and trading is conducted. If the Justice Department gets involved, the very fabric of the computer industry could be rewoven. Yet none of these possibilities poses an immediate threat to computer users’ strategies. The almost insoluble problem at hand is that many options have been rendered dubious by the dispute. A lessee cannot sublease a machine without great annoyance and difficulty. A prospective buyer of used equipment may feel uncomfortable without iron-clad proof that the gear is rightfully the seller’s. A prime lessee cannot make long commitments without wondering if all the traditional escapes have been blocked. A company that wants to upgrade or reconfigure a machine is almost without an option: the seemingly simple choice of going directly to IBM may later turn out to be unnecessarily expensive compared with the alternatives offered by independents. The rules of computer acquisition will have to be made logical and explicit so every party with a vested interest can assess its current position and future direction. This process can occur even after a court decision, and it could still involve compromise between IBM Credit and its competitors, no matter how the litigation winds up. Spite has no place here. The law doesn’t limit a victor’s generosity. If anything, grace in business is rewarded by customers’ confidence.Even the bad manners displayed during the heat of battle can be excused or at least forgiven… like yesterday’s headlines. Copyright (C) 1991 Technology

News of America Co IncAll rights reserved.