Slashdot Log In
EU Says Microsoft Still Not Compliant
Posted by
Zonk
on Fri Mar 10, 2006 05:07 PM
from the comply-with-this dept.
from the comply-with-this dept.
what about writes "News.com is reporting that the European Union still doesn't consider Microsoft in compliance with its anti-trust ruling." From the article: "Should the Commission issue a final decision against Microsoft, the software giant would face a retroactive fine of $2.36 million a day for the period between Dec. 15 and the date the final decision is issued. The Commission may then take additional steps to extend the daily fine until Microsoft complies with the order. The Commission's letter is just the latest action it has taken in the closely watched antitrust case. "
Related Stories
[+]
Microsoft To Fight Korean Verdict 139 comments
DocHart wrote to mention a BBC article covering Microsoft's appeal against their recent Korean ruling. From the article: "The KFTC continued to investigate Microsoft's practices, despite the firm paying Daum $30m in November to end their dispute. The ruling of the KFTC echoes a similar 2004 judgement by the European Commission, which also found that Microsoft was abusing its market domination. Microsoft's rivals have since accused the firm of dragging its feet over unbundling its software in Europe, something Microsoft denies. "
[+]
Microsoft turns to U.S. for EU Antitrust Help 333 comments
An anonymous reader writes "The NY times reports that Microsoft has asked U.S. goverment officials to intervene on their behalf in the EU antitrust case. The US (through diplomatic channels) has asked the court to be 'fair'." From the article: "Microsoft has complained frequently in recent months that it has been denied the right to a fair defense in the continuing antitrust case with the European Commission. It has also accused the commission of collaborating with its rivals in the software industry and denying it access to what it contends are vital documents it needs to prepare its defense. A memo written by unidentified government officials in Washington stated that Microsoft's complaints raise 'substantial concerns' about the way Microsoft is being treated, according to a person close to the commission who spoke on the condition of anonymity because he was not authorized to discuss the memo."
[+]
Microsoft To Appeal EU Decision 237 comments
An anonymous reader writes "News.com has an article on Microsoft's upcoming appeal of the EU antitrust decision. Their argument is essentially that they shouldn't be penalized for becoming successful in a marketplace." From the article: "Microsoft relies on the fact that its communication protocols are technologically innovative and are covered by intellectual-property rights ... [the company] had designed its Windows server operating systems from the outset to interoperate with non-Microsoft server operating systems"
[+]
EU Prepared to Fine Microsoft $2.5 Million Per Day 659 comments
Lord_Slepnir writes "The European Union is unsatisfied with Microsoft's compliance with their anti-trust compliance from 2004, and is preparing to fine them 2 million Euros ($2.5m US) per day until they comply. Under that ruling, Microsoft must open up parts of their operating system to competitors, and change how they bundle Media Player." From the article: "On Monday, Microsoft said it had begun to provide the information Brussels had demanded, but the Commission has signaled the company acted too late. In December, Brussels informed the software giant that it had failed to comply with the original ruling it issued in March 2004."
This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
Full
Abbreviated
Hidden
Loading... please wait.
Is 2.36 million a day (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:5, Interesting)
Apple has confirmed that it's taken the number one spot in the western European education market.
Apple's education market share in western Europe is now 15.2 per cent, relegating Dell, with 14.7 per cent, to second place.
If Apple owns 15.2% of the EU market that leaves 84.8% that are running Windows minus the small percentage that are running Linux. It's all very well putting Apple in the number 1 PC vendor spot but the Windows share is Dell plus any number of other Intel/MS manufacturers plus schools that build their own and use site wide volume licences etc.
Without wishing to piss on the Apple parade, MS are still the number 1 OS in education. Believe me, I wish it were otherwise as I've spent some time putting Linux/Samba in place of a school's NT network and I soooooooo want to run Linux clients but there's just so much curriculum software for Windows that can't be replaced with what's available for Linux/MAC.
On the other hand, I don't see how MS can win this one. The validity of their licences in the EU only holds because EU law supports them. If MS take the piss it only needs shrink wrapped licences to be declared invalid and MS are bolloxed.
The EU could also change competition law and make the max daily fine 10 million or 10 billion. If MS threaten to pull out of Europe you can look at it two ways, 1 - a disaster that could hurt the European economy or 2 - an opportunity for the birth of a whole new European software industry. OK so start the flames but at the end of the day there are many people who have stomped out of their workplace convinced that the company that's treated them so badly will suffer only to find that after a short period of readjustment the company forgets they even existed.
In the event of MS exiting Europe you can expect to see many of today's Linux geeks being tomorrows training company millionaires. Roll it on, that's what I say.
Parent
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:4, Interesting)
I'm not shocked, here in Spain (and everywhere) the public schools are teaching windows/office on computer classes to all kids.
I mean, public schools are wasting lots of millions in making people learn microsoft-only technologies, and Microsoft is not wasting a single pennie on educating them.
"Public schools - monopolize yourself (tm)"
Parent
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:4, Interesting)
Parent
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:4, Interesting)
Microsoft certainly can effectively use it's money as a weapon against other private companies and it certainly can gain a lot of influence with some goverments around the world, however when it comes to other governments it must toe the line just like the corner store or suffer the consequences.
It has already pushed to far, behaved like an ugly American company, all it can do now is tone down it's defence and basically shut up and take what is coming. Microsoft is to stubborn to do that and will instead continue pushing and make more nonsence demands and end up doing nothing but creating a more hostile EU and further aggravate the court.
Parent
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:5, Insightful)
Well the article says:
the software giant would face a retroactive fine of $2.36 million a day for the period between Dec. 15 and the date the final decision is issued
It's been 85 days since Dec 15, 2005. So that means that the fine would already be $202 million. Microsoft's market cap is $281 bilion [yahoo.com]. So I guess it's not a big % of their budget. On the other hand, this fine represents an "operating cost" of $861 million a year. Paying out a billion dollars a year is not a trivial amount of money, even for MS. It's not so much that they "can't afford it" since they have large reserves of cash (enough to pay off this fine for many years, no doubt)... it's more that investors are not going to be pleased knowing that $1 billion/year is disappearing without any return on it. That will negatively affect stock prices, hence affect Microsoft's ability to operate, compete, etc.
Plus, I would fully expect the EU to increase the daily fine if this went on for a long time. I'm sure other laws would come into play also, based on Microsoft's obvious ignoring of rulings. They could be ordered to stop doing business in the EU altogether. After all, if they are unwilling to comply with this legal directive, then who knows what others laws they might ignore. You can't afford to have rogue companies operating in your countries!
So I think MS will have to take this fine seriously, one way or another.
Parent
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:5, Insightful)
The return is in that they can stunt competition - they desperately do not want competitors to be able to interoperate otherwise they risk losing their monopoly. If there were truly no return, then they would have made the change shortly after the initial request.
LetterRip
Parent
Re:Is 2.36 million a day (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Wrist-slapping (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Wrist-slapping (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Wrist-slapping (Score:3, Insightful)
So in USDoJ v. Microsoft, as a necessary part of that lawsuit, it was determined that Microsoft had market power in the operating systems markets, and that they had illegally maintained this market power. This was necessary to determine that there was a Sherman Act violation.
So now, with Nov
One clear point here (Score:5, Insightful)
"Competitors" can and does include commercial, for-profit and non-profit competition alike. Whatever organization that is "Samba" along with whatever organization that is "OpenOffice" and whatever organization that is "Ximian" all qualify in this regard as far as I can tell.
Frankly, this is kind of fun to watch Microsoft in this losing battle. They are attempting to play this the way they played it in the U.S. and these people AREN'T Americans and probably dislike American companies... especially arrogant ones like Microsoft.
I just wonder if I will have to wait until Christmas to get my presents...
Re:One clear point here (Score:3)
No surprise. (Score:4, Informative)
Based upon recent Microsoft diversionary tactics (publicising the documents, filing suit in the US, etc.), it was evident that Microsoft knew they weren't complying with the ruling. That is why Micorosft was trying to divert everyone's attention to other matters.
A nontrivial penalty (Score:5, Insightful)
Microsoft's revenues are ~$40 billion annually, leading to a ~$13 billion profit. $2.36 million per day is $861 million per year, or 6% of Microsoft's yearly profits. While it won't kill them, figures like that are enough to make investors (and their lawsuit-happy lawyers) sit up and take notice.
It's also important to realize that this will only be the beginning. If MS continues to flout the EU's penalties, they will only get stiffer. In a fight between a multinational corporation and a multinational government, I'm betting on the EU this time.
Maybe EU is getting all MS have... :) (Score:5, Funny)
Microsoft, however, contends it has gone above and beyond industry requirements for documentation.
LOL, MS may actually speak the truth, and "inadequate" and "self-contradictory" may exactly be what the technical docs are.
What would I expect ? (Score:4, Insightful)
Also, I get somewhat intimidated by Microsoft and their legal threats. I don't mind what software other people use, but I do object to anyone stopping me using what software I want. The important thing for me is that I should have the right to take my software apart, change and fix it, and put it back together again.
The end game (Score:3, Informative)
These refer to this disclosure [slashdot.org]. Checkmate, I think.
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
It would be great to get off gasoline- But if gasoline were suddenly unavailable, despite the fact that we could grow corn and use ethanol or walk or whatever (the replacement isn't the issue), the unplanned switchover would be very painful....
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
And then the further problem is that most stations only sell conventional gasoline or diesel. If more stations sold E85, more people might choose to use that fuel.
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
After one time of denying service, businesses can not afford to commit to them again because now there is a risk they will do it again. You have a fiscal obligation to avoid/mitigate such risks when you run a business.
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Besides...the result of cutting off Microsoft would not be that people would stop using Microsoft products during the transition; they'd just stop paying Microsoft for the privelege.
This hurts Microsoft more than it hurts anyone else.
What's more, having the open source culture is why the EU isn't fooled by Microsoft's hedging.
If Microsoft actually complies, then all open-source apps can work seamlessly with Microsoft formats. Although they'll be built in Europe, nothing's to stop you from using those apps anywhere else in the world. If you can work seamlessly with a Word document without using MS-Word, why would you buy MS-Word? So despite all of this, what the EU requested, actual compliance with the directive, may be worse for Microsoft than the fine!
Microsoft's best bet is to hold on for as long as possible and hope that, with the release of Vista, they can use the loophole ("But we're not selling XP; you have to prosecute us again over this new product") or, somehow, convince major markets of the world to ban all Open Source Software written after they comply with the directive.
To paraphrase Zathras, "Either way, things bad for Microsoft."
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree that it would hurt Microsoft's image in Europe but it would also hurt the EU's image and many politicians would lose their job. Offices need Microsoft and have proprietary formats for data from win32 specific apps. THey can't just switch.
These offices pay in the form of lobbying particular politicians to office. If the EU's anticompetitive commision grows any balls then heads will roll and people will be fired until it finds employees friendly to Microsoft. Just look at
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
I agree that it would hurt Microsoft's image in Europe but it would also hurt the EU's image and many politicians would lose their job. Offices need Microsoft and have proprietary formats for data from win32 specific apps. THey can't just switch.
They can't switch overnight, yes. And most of the government bodies already has licenses they need for the time of switch. They can't
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
Deny tech support to companies/users in Europe.
Buy advertising stating why they're pulling out of the market.
Which would only underline the EU's point.
Can you imagine the backlash
Yes I can, but I think this backlash would not quite be in the same direction as you think. In fact, it would be the worst thing Microsoft could ever do. I know I would certainly boycott a company that thought it was above the law.
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
A public outcry in Europe to back an US monopolist trying to strongarm a European institution? You must be dreaming!
As soon as this issue comes to the headlines and frontpages, MS would draw all the widespread critique of US hegemonialism and cowboy politics on itself. And this is not limited to single nations or leftwing circles at all but is a view shared by many in the upper ranks of corporate Europe as well.
And there are lots of anti-US sentiments in latency which would tend to manifest themselves if such an issue was driven to a confrontation.
To become a symbol of "typical American" is a pr disaster and I do not think MS will offer themselves as a scapegoat like that.
In fact, one of the factors that allowed MS to grow strong here was the emphasis they put on localisation. And this was not invented in Redmond, Wash., it was an issue put forward by European branches, and Redmond listened, and took the advice.
Of course this is only speculation on my part but I wouldn't be surprised to learn they still know to listen to the locals and know better than to risk a full scale open confrontation.
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Interesting)
Yay! I'd actually be very happy about that decision. Anyone who uses windows for home mostly pirates it here, but the government would be forced to not buy the overpriced Windows any more (The government here also bought windows licenses for everyone in higher education - they could axe that too!).
Hurray for EU!
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:5, Interesting)
yes, imagine the backlash as thousands of companies in Europe start suing Microsoft for breach of contract when MS refuses them support. That ought to go down well with the shareholders.
+5 insightful, fuck off! This guy has no idea what he's talking about.
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Everybody in EU would start looking for altenatives to Windows and some of them would even find better solutions than what the had with windows.
And for those who would'nt find an avaiable replacement that meets their requiement there would be hundreads of companies in EU that pops up to provide them with one.
That would be very good for the EU , open source software and Apple and realy bad for Microsoft
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
I think you overestimate people. In my experience, most people are too reluctant to change, they'd rather complain endlessly than actually do things that require effort.
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
As you note, such a move is risky. Rather than angry pitchfork carrying crowds forcing the Eurocrats in Brussels to stop their cruel treatment of the underdog of Redmond, what could happen is that people would adopt other solutions, like Linux or the Mac.
Given my own love hate relationship with Linux, I don't see lots of non-technical users jumping on the Penguin waggon in the near future. But a move by Microsoft to pull out of the European market would force current Microsoft users to think of Micros
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
Most of all, if I was a business relying on a software vendor that one day decided to halt support to prove a political point, that would be the day I fire up the installer for their competitors.
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:5, Insightful)
About 20 years ago I went into a library and out of the corner of my eye I saw
a headline of a British newspaper from 1901 that caught my attention.
The headline read:
"Storm in English Channel cuts off Europe from Britain"
I laughed when I saw that because it demonstrated the inherent arrogance of
that journalist's perspective on relative value.
Your comment is just like that headline. Let's consider some facts shall we?
1) Microsoft is a US based corporation.
2) Microsoft employs what 60,000? 80,000 people?
3) Last time I checked the EU contained over 300 million people.
THE EU is playing hardball?!?!
No my friend, I don't think so.
I think Microsoft is playing a game of chicken
because that's the only game they know how to play.
They think that if they threaten to take away their
marbles that the EU will cave in. That has worked
in the past (in the US), but I think the EU is
getting sick and tired of being treated as a second
fiddle to the US and they have no loyalty to Microsoft.
No, I think Microsoft is about to discover that the
EU doesn't play by Microsoft's rules.
--- Johnny
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Insightful)
So say it happened, and no-one in Europe could buy Windows or Office.
So what? We'd all just copy them. How could it be copyright infringement? They're not available for sale, after all, so what money would they be losing? Yes, I realise that that's not quite how it works, but in such a situation how many EU governments would care?
Once the people get angry, I'm sure the officials would change their minds real quick.
Yes, because that worked so well for the Iraq war. A million people marched in London, yet our troops are still there.
Besides, people wouldn't get angry about this. Oh sure, they'd moan and they'd grumble, but *everyone* knows *someone* who'd be able to get their hands on a cracked copy of Windows and Office. Most people don't bother because there's no need - most people get Windows preinstalled on new PCs and never need a new copy. Were that to change, there'd just be a whole lot more pirated copies in use.
Parent
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:3, Insightful)
This would result in two things: a surge in non-Microsoft tools (Wordperfect, Lotus, OpenOffice, etc.) and a large grey-market where copies are "illegally" imported from other venues.
Deny tech support to companies/users in Europe.
Please do. And please advertise it in advance. Is there anyone in Europe who could help me migrate over there and set up a Microsoft tech support office? Of course, I'm quite positive many enterprizing Europeans will be salivating at the idea of d
Re:May be risky, but... (Score:4, Funny)
No.
The EU is a government.
"Hard ball" for a government is property seizure, jail, expulsion, death squads, and war.
Fines aren't even softball, that's just the governments way of letting you know they might get angry if you keep doing what you've been doing.
Parent
Re:The real problem with this is... (Score:3, Insightful)
The same thing that would happen if YOU lost a lawsuit and refused to pay. You assets would be seized to pay off the debt.
-Charles
Re:The real problem with this is... (Score:3, Interesting)
This way MS can't do the "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run" business to anybody ever again. This means that they have to actually compete, rather than driving app vendors out of business with OS t
Re:Budget Filler? (Score:4, Informative)
Except that Microsoft is a near monopoly and is playing dirty to avoid stop being the major player.
The Commission is asking Microsoft to DO-CU-MENT some things - propietary protocols used by windows clients like printing, networking etc. The commission is fining Microsoft because no matter how hard they try, Microsoft is NOT documenting anything.
The Commission wouldn't have to fine Microsoft if they didn't behave that way, in first place. Other companies haven't been able to compete with Microsoft for decades. Not because they don't know to create great products, but because Microsoft uses propietary protocols and tricks.
Why do you think Microsoft is selling so many windows servers? Is not that solaris & friends are bad server operative systems. Microsoft integrates clients with their servers using dirty tricks so no other server operating system on earth can integrate so tightly with windows clients as windows server does. Even if a company wants to compete, they CANT.
The commission is asking microsoft to document some things so other companies can compete as God intended. They're not asking them to give up their market share - they can continue being top 1 by creating good products - they're just forcing Microsoft to give opportunities to other companies. Microsoft is doing the impposible to avoid it, because they know sun, ibm, redhat etc. can build GREAT products which can put Windows server in shame, and they're not going to allow it if they can avoid it. I'm HAPPY Europe is doint this with Microsoft, the legal American system tried to do the same in the past but failed. Someone had to do it.
Parent
Re:Budget Filler? (Score:3, Interesting)
No, that is not why. The reason is that Microsoft has a sufficiently large proportion of desktop systems (usually through bundling arrangements with PC companies) that, if it keeps these proprietary protocols private, it can force sales of server systems above the level that might be s
Re:EU wants the cash no matter what MS does (Score:4, Informative)
Yes, they have. The EU said that Microsoft had to provide complete and accurate reference documentation of API's, etc. so that third party developers would be able to make use of it. Microsoft said "rather than that, we'll make the source code available so those third parties can see exactly what our code does".
As someone who has developed software professionaly for ten years I can tell you that there's a HUGE difference between source code and documented API's and data structures. Trying to figure out what a complex function does just by looking at source code is extremely difficult. With something as complex as Windows it'd be virtually impossible. Having access to the source code would just be a huge waste of time & money. Having access to accurately documented API's would be a godsend to MS competitors.
Not to mention the fact that in TFA it states that a company hired to reverse engineer some of the MS code in order to validate the documentation they DID provide found the documentation to be "self-contradictory".
Parent
Re:EU wants the cash no matter what MS does (Score:3, Insightful)
MS: What's wrong with it? What parts are unclear?
Ah, yes. Except that the "documentation" that the commission is asking would actually allow other people (redhat, novell, sun, ibm) to build products which could integrate with windows clients so tightly as windows servers do.
Remember that 95% of the clients on the world use windows, so it's just NOT POSSIBLE to compete with Microsoft without that documentation. Non-microsoft server operating systems can't compete with microsoft witho
Re:STUPID EU... (Score:3, Insightful)
1. Perhaps the EU is a larger market space than the US - that's not subject to debate. What is up for discussion here is the EU subjecting a corporation to change their practices simply because other ventures are unable to parallel.
Not exactly. A corporation is subjected to change their practices by the EU because it is preventing competition. I'm sure a big factor of why the EU isn't giving in, like the DOJ did in the US, is because microsoft isn't a european corporation. But even this is ir