As an academic argument, I would like to consider the following: 1. Given: M$ released a product which contained "enabling technology" which allowed this event to occur. 2. Given: This event was a Virus/Worm which used Visual Basic Scripting and the Outlook Address Book to duplicate and proliferate itself to a large number of systems at a fairly high rate of speed. 3. Given: Storing and forwarding mail costs money. 3. Fact: M$ Has a monopoly position. (Federal court ruling) 4. Theorum: Companies and other Entities which provide relay service for an organization which falls victim to this event incurred costs as a result of the event. Proof: Statement Reason =========================================== ============================== Storing and Forwarding mail costs money. Given (3). Relays store and forward mail. Definition of Relay. The virus generated a large amount of mail Given (2), nature of email to be relayed. forwarding. Entities providing relay service incurred Given (3) and previous costs. statements As such, I would argue that M$ release of a product with such widely known exploitable vulnerabilities into a the market including customers of any given relay service entity may, indeed, create standing for that service entity to sue M$ on the basis of costs incurred due to M$ negligence and negligent business practices. Owen