Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Microsoft Corp. has agreed to pay $14.4 million to settle allegations that the global software giant retaliated and discriminated against employees who took protected leave, including parental and ...
Because of the structure of the settlement, the law firm which sued Microsoft could end up getting more money from the company than California consumers and schools, the beneficiaries of the settlement. In 2006, Microsoft initiated an investigation of Lithuanian government institutions for determining whether they choose long-term strategies of ...
Microsoft has reached a $14.4 million settlement with California’s Civil Rights Department over claims the company discriminated against employees who were on parental and disability leave.
Microsoft to pay $14.4-million settlement after California accused it of retaliation and discrimination against workers who take parental or disability leave.
Microsoft v. Lindows.com, Inc. was a court case brought by Microsoft against Lindows, Inc in December 2001, claiming that the name "Lindows" was a violation of its trademark "Windows." After two and a half years of court battles, Microsoft paid US$20 million for the Lindows trademark, and Lindows Inc. became Linspire Inc.
Microsoft's obligations under the settlement, as originally drafted, expired on November 12, 2007. [34] However, Microsoft later "agreed to consent to a two-year extension of part of the Final Judgments" dealing with communications protocol licensing, and stated that if the government later wished to extend those aspects of the settlement as ...
Microsoft Corp has agreed to pay $14 million to settle a California agency's claims that it illegally penalized workers who took medical or family-care leave, the agency said on Wednesday. The ...
Alcatel-Lucent v. Microsoft Corp., also known as Lucent Technologies Inc. v. Gateway Inc., was a long-running patent infringement case between Alcatel-Lucent and Microsoft litigated in the United States District Court for the Southern District of California and appealed multiple times to the United States Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit.