Microsoft Loses EU Anti-Trust Appeal 322
Kugrian writes "Microsoft has lost its appeal against a record 497m euro (£343m; $690m) fine imposed by the European Commission in a long-running competition dispute. The European Court of First Instance upheld the ruling that Microsoft had abused its dominant market position."
This isn't justice: too little, too late (Score:5, Insightful)
The biggest problem is that it took 10 years to get to this point, and Microsoft still hasn't disclosed the specs for how to make interoperable products. We're fortunate that the Free Software way of doing things is rebost enough to survive in spite of this, but profit-oriented companies simply can't hold out long enough for this kind of legal system to really help.
What we need is clear legal rules that vendors with dominant market positions must adhere to genuinely open standards for all protocols and document formats, and of course we also need a genuinely non-corrupt standardization organization [openiso.org] Microsoft doesn't sell us something as an "open standard" which really isn't.
Least important part of the judgement... (Score:4, Insightful)
Of more significance is the fact that MS will be forced to release more code to allow competitors to compete on a level playing field with MS applications...
Damages, but sanctions? (Score:3, Insightful)
I mean $690 million is almost a rounding error at Microsoft.
Re:sheeeit. (Score:4, Insightful)
Just like the browser wars any competing media player had to fight against one that was installed on just about every PC anyway. An advantage MS used to sell their WM tech. Unfortunately as somebody already pointed out, it was too little, too late and more of a symbolic gesture. Other parts of the ruling (documenting the APIs) were more important.
XP(N) was just a side effect that MS milked for propaganda purposes (Look at those stupid eurocrats! Noone wants a crippled Windows, they just want to punish a successful company, stupid socialist French, yaddayadda)
The contradiction of capitalism (Score:1, Insightful)
The problem with monetary judgements (Score:2, Insightful)
Fining Microsoft is much the same case, it means nothing. Barely a blip on their radar. You want to really penalize them, start trustbusting. "Oh, I'm sorry Microsoft, you cannot sell your OS within our territory with Media Player, you must bundle it with this other player. Oh, it costs you $25 per copy to bundle it? Too bad, oh, and you now are under price-restrictions as well, and you have to drop the price of Windows to boot. I figure $5 OEM cost. What was that, you'd be loosing $20 for every machine that ships with Windows? Well, it is your choice weither you sell it to OEM's now, isn't it? Now let's talk about Internet Explorer, shall we?"
Re:This isn't justice: too little, too late (Score:5, Insightful)
There is no problem even in that case. There are close to a billion computers right now; and Microsoft software runs on well over 80% of them all. So what if they weren't a monopoly 20 years ago? The protocols in use RIGHT NOW must be open for public access.
By any yardstick, it is very clear that Microsoft IS A MONOPLY in the massive worlwide PC market.
Re:Quel surprise! (Score:5, Insightful)
Surprise surprise, a European court punished a company for breaking the law. Don't blame the EU for not slapping them on the wrist like the USA did. Perhaps if the USA enforced its own laws properly then it wouldn't have been necessary for the EU to pursue this case.
Re:legislating market share? (Score:5, Insightful)
You argument seems to stem from the misbelief that Operating System software is a competitive market and that Microsoft got to 90% by competing fairly. If so then you would be very wrong.
If you read today's judgement [europa.eu], you will see that Microsoft has regularly abused its' position by bundling, threats, bribes, agreements with OEMs and so on.
Operating Systems is not a competitive market at all, if you use Linux then you will know that the biggest problem is not Windows itself but the fact that it is so dominant. As soon as you use Linux you find that shops, ISPs, firms, manufacturers and so on treat you as a second class citizen. This needs to be broken for the social good.
Re:Least important part of the judgement... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This isn't justice: too little, too late (Score:3, Insightful)
But the big winner is still microsoft of course, no way the fine undoes the years taking advantage.
I guess the software / IT market is still growing up slowly / steadily & things like this were bound to happen.
Let's hope it never has to come to that again.
Wishful thinking by EU (Score:2, Insightful)
free to compete on the merits, the logical consequence of that
would be to expect Microsoft's market share to fall," spokesman
Jonathan Todd said.
http://www.reuters.com/article/marketsNews/idUKL1720058720070917?rpc=44 [reuters.com]
I'm no big fan of Microsoft but the statements made by the EU spokes-people are more wishful thinking than reality. Even with "fair" competition Microsoft will still dominate due to the strong network effect inherent in operating systems used by the general public.
Excellent job, Neelie Kroes !! (Score:2, Insightful)
Personally I think this latest verdict will do little to nothing in the real word, and most of its value lies in the precedent it sets. Microsoft is a huge company, with deep pockets, good lawyers and used to dealing with lawsuits. If they get hammered, get fined, appeal, and lose again, then any company is subject to the same if they break anti-competitive rules. It also re-affirms that EU courts at least have the power to kick ass if need be. For all that, this verdict is very significant.
Other than that, I'd just like to congratulate mrs. Neelie Kroes for a long, hard job well done. She was always known in my country (the Netherlands) for being the exact opposite of a push-over (and many disliked her for that very reason), but where she is now, you need someone with exactly that personality.
So Neelie Kroes: we congratulate you, and bow to you! Bring out the champagne! (hey, if nothing else, pulling several 100 millions from Microsoft's pockets isn't a bad thing ;-)
Re:The problem with monetary judgements (Score:3, Insightful)
The fines should be large enough to compensate for his waste. If they aren't then they should be increased until they are.
The money from the fines should be used to improve the infrastructure, like waste treatment or desalination plants.
Same goes for MS: The fines should be large enough to compensate for the damage MS is causing and used to repair it. The fines should be large enough that the benefit MS obtains by continuing their behavior is smaller than the fines they pay.
the battle has moved on: DRM & BBC iPlayer (Score:3, Insightful)
Perhaps the obligation to publish interfaces will bear fruit, but only if MS get appropriately punished in a timely manner when what they initially publish turns out to bear no relation to what is actually in 'doze, or does relate to it, but doesn't actually contain sufficient information to get the job done.
In the mean time, the BBC have handed control of their on-line content over to MS in the form of the BBC iPlayer, which relies on MS DRM. By the time that the EU notices that, they'll have killed off the currently vibrant set-top box market, and the bulk of them will be running some form of WinCE. At least that's the danger, which people a need to get excited about now [defectivebydesign.org] if it's not to come to pass.
Re:This isn't justice: too little, too late (Score:5, Insightful)
It is also clear that they maintain their monopoly by abusive practices and that the US government doesn't do anything to fix this. See the outcome of the microsoft US trial.
So it's now clear that microsoft is used as a leverage by the us government and other governments have to step in and protect themselves. Which is happening.
Re:Chinese Takeout (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This isn't justice: too little, too late (Score:3, Insightful)
You forgot to add Notepad, Calculator, and Paint. Do you even have any idea what you're talking about. Your post is coming off pretty silly with this "multitasking test" if you ask me.
What I'm speaking about is personal experience, and the experience of many other people who's job is to care about those things, but hell, if you can run few copies of Access and not get "death by multitasking" (?) then I must be Microsoft hater spreading FUD.
Re:This isn't justice: too little, too late (Score:5, Insightful)
Unfortunately, you can't do that anymore. Liberals may not win any elections, but they sure won one part of the "small, powerless government" agenda, and it ain't the "small" one. There's very little a government can do nowadays about large corporations. The problem, as others have pointed out, is that the justice system just takes too damn long. If a corporation can afford the fine, it can afford to simply wait out, because by the time the judgement comes down, it'll be mostly meaningless.
So fines don't cut it, unless you go to extremes like in my first sentence.
You need something equivalent to what we consider totally normal if the criminal is an individual: Lock him up during the trial, so he can't kill/rape/rob someone else in the meantime.
If MS were in danger of being shut down until the case is closed, I'm pretty sure they would be much more enthusiastic of following what's essentially their probation conditions.
Re:This isn't justice: too little, too late (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:who cares.., (Score:3, Insightful)
The problem isn't "bundling products", the problem is intentional leverage of market share to maintain more market share.
Re:What about Apple? (Score:1, Insightful)
I seriously doubt that you are an economics major.