As reported in the Seattle Times, and nowhere else in the mainstream press (but here's Patently-O):

U.S. District Judge Leonard Davis... cited several instances of misconduct and "ample circumstantial evidence" that Microsoft viewed the patent-holder, closely held z4 Technologies, as "a small and irrelevant company that was not worthy of Microsoft's time and attention, even if Microsoft was potentially infringing its patents."

The defendants marked 3,449 exhibits, but only admitted 107 of them at trial. "The Court concludes that Defendants attempted to bury the relevant 107 exhibits ... in a massive pile of decoys," Davis wrote.

He cited several examples in which the defendants failed to fully and promptly disclose evidence, calling one instance "an intentional attempt by Defendants to mislead z4 and this Court."

In sum, Davis wrote that the court was "greatly disturbed by the repeated instances where Defendants actions go beyond what can be dismissed as a mere appearance of impropriety and collectively appear to represent a pattern which is of disappointment to the Court and a disservice to legitimate advocacy."

AutoDesk was also party to the shenanigans, and though its infringement not found willful, must chip in an additional $322,000 towards z4's legal costs, beyond what was originally slated.

Judge Davis told z4 it would have to file another lawsuit for further compensation of ongoing infringement. Microsoft plans to exclude the infringing product activation technology in its upcoming Windows Vista operating system release, scheduled to hit the consumer market sometime in 2007, after more than a year's delay owing to development snafus and bugs in the software.

The judge denied defendants' request for a new trial, and other judgments. Microsoft expressed disappointment, and vowed to appeal; the juggernaut rolls on, oblivious to ethics.