Microsoft turns to U.S. for EU Antitrust Help 333
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."
Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:2)
Re:Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:2)
Me too. Those serifs HURT!
~Philly
Re:Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Bill Gates declares EU "Axis of Evil" (Score:2)
Might be closer to the truth than you think... (Score:2)
I feel a parlor game coming on... (Score:2)
No, I think you mean that character from The Tempest...
unidentified, anonymity, denials. (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:unidentified, anonymity, denials. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:unidentified, anonymity, denials. (Score:4, Funny)
Re:unidentified, anonymity, denials. (Score:3, Funny)
Re:unidentified, anonymity, denials. (Score:2)
Yes, however (correct me if I am wrong) they cite the story linked above. Which would be a valid source, because if its wrong its not thier fault.
On the other hand saying things like "Anonymous source" is liable to get you spanked in the media in the EU, we as in the US the media outlet just has to prove they didn't mean any malice in what they printed and they can pretty much print what they like.
Dupe - Judge said NO? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Dupe - Judge said NO? (Score:2)
Re:Dupe - Judge said NO? (Score:3, Funny)
Except the E that is for England.
Re:Dupe - Judge said NO? (Score:2)
Re:Dupe - Judge said NO? (Score:2)
And if you think about it, the "E" in EU is for Europe which is not a part of the U.S. that last time I looked.
Sure, except England is a major player in the EU, and Tony Blair is George Bush's bitch. Sovereignty and jurisdiction don't matter when you have a puppet in the UK.
Re:Dupe - Judge said NO? (Score:2)
Microsoft's complaints raise 'substantial concerns (Score:2, Interesting)
What, they take Microsoft's word for it just like that?!
Re:Microsoft's complaints raise 'substantial conce (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Microsoft's complaints raise 'substantial conce (Score:3, Funny)
A memo written by unidentified government officials in Washington stated that addressing Microsoft's complaints could result in 'substantial donations'
Mummy, mummy, bad people try to scare me (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Mummy, mummy, bad people try to scare me (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm sure there's an important point in there somewhere... if you have a good defense, you dont need to be scared.. Microsoft are running scared.. hmm.. definitely something that can be deduced here.. =_=
Re:Mummy, mummy, bad people try to scare me (Score:4, Insightful)
The EC is asking them to do things like ie: Documenting some propietary protocols which they use between windows clients and windows servers, because 95% of the clients are windows clients and hence non-microsoft servers can't compete fairly even if they're able to build better products than microsoft. Other companies document things [apple.com] but they know that if they start to be fair with competition and document things their competitors may break their monopoly. Unsurprisingly, Microsoft is trying to do everything they can to stop it, because even if they document those things only for european programmers, they products created with that documentation can be sold in the rest of the world. So Microsoft is trying to look like the poor guy and make the EC look like it's being obssesive and hates US companies (like Europe cares about that, Microsoft competitors are all american companies aswell).
Hey, fighting worked in the US when the US government failed to protect true competition, why wouldn't it work again.
Re:Why wouldn't it work again? (Score:2, Interesting)
This will be a good time to see to what extent there is still a difference between the EU and the US concerning the entanglement of politics and business. I for one sure hope there still is one.
J.
Re:Mummy, mummy, bad people try to scare me (Score:5, Informative)
Microsoft is doing anything and everything to NOT obey the courts order. They are supplying half-assed documentation that the oversite expert ( suggsted by Microsoft ) says the document is useless. They haven't done the "unbundling" that they were ordered to do either.
who lies more (Score:3, Insightful)
Why?! (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Why?! (Score:5, Informative)
US company comes into EU, gets treated nicely.
Said company breaks laws in EU, gets taken to court (anti trust).
Company gets upset that people have told it that it's being naughty, asks US to back it up, because it's not fair, people are picking on it.
US tells company to grow up and deal with it like everyone else.
Re:Why?! (Score:4, Insightful)
Only in your wildest dreams as long as there's a republican in the white house.
If your memory hasn't yet succumbed to alzheimers, you'll recall that when he came to power, justice was just a few more hearings from issueing a probable breakup order that would make Judge Greens AT&T order look like THE precedent setting order of the century.
He gets sworn in on the 20th of January, and by Feb 1, justice has been told to stand down in no uncertain terms.
Then, just because 'he needs to finish this war' he gets another 4 years to play God from the sheeple. Methinks theres some confusion in his mind as to just who is God, him or the real one.
I didn't vote for him the second time, and I damned sure hope the dems can come up with a candidate that doesn't come with all the baggage the last 2 had a huge excess of, even turning off diehard deomcrats because they were actually seen as the worst of 2 evils.
So the sheeple here voted for the lessor of 2 evils, not fully understanding the depths of the ranking on a true scale.
As a senior citizen who may not have that many more elections to exersize my right to vote in, I am truely sad for my country.
And I would hope, probably futily, that washington will have the decent good sense to stay the hell out of this dogfight, its not theirs, although their past in-actions HAVE certainly allowed it to become one. Its been business as usual in Redmond for 6 years that should never have been allowed to happen IMO.
--
Cheers, Gene
Re:Why?! (Score:2)
What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:4, Interesting)
All they need to do is clearly legislate that software patents are not allowed in Europe and the rest will take care of itself. Open source alternatives will establish themselves more quickly in the mainstream and competition will accellerate like there's no tommorrow.
Re:What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:3, Insightful)
Patents however will do. That's what I mean when I say they the EC are concentrating too much on what has already happened, and not enough on what different tactics are open to MS for future abuse.
Re:What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:2)
Umm, how exactly would that cause incredible collateral pain?
Nobody would have to stop using existing installations. There would be some upgrades in progress that might have to stop, but not too much. Certainly now, before Vista ships, would be a good time to do such a thing.
After all, its not as if everyone in the EU is using all the so-called advanced (read deliberately non-interoperable) features of windows servers.
Re:What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:2)
given the incredible collateral pain that would cause for EU businesses, I can't in any way shape or form see anything even remotely close to that happening.
It needn't cause any pain. Instead of banning Microsoft's products in the EU, the commission could just declare that the copyrights on all of Microsoft's current products are null and void in the EU, placing them in the public domain. Then ban sales of all new Microsoft products. Businesses would be able to get done what they need to in the short
Re:What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:4, Insightful)
For example, if the US went berserk and threatened the EU with economic sanctions if poor, poor Microsoft wasn't met with a bit more forgivingness the EU could settle the case with a slap on the wrist and then ban software (and related) patents in any form, commence a continent-wide government IT switch to Linux/BSD/OS X, decree that each and every document used for conversation between/with governmental bodies has to be in Open Document format (or another open standard where apprpriate) without vendor-specific extensions of any kind and set money aside to subsidize FOSS and companies deploying/switching to FOSS solutions.
Entirely unquestionable, entirely doable and entirely a huge raised middle finger. Not to mention that a lot of ISVs would see this continent-wide switch to *nix as a reason to port their software to *nix, which would not only weaken Microsoft's position in the OS market but also take away one of Windows' biggest strengths.
In the end the result is always the same: Microsoft has to make sure they don't anger the EU enough to warrant serious action against them, even if it would save them in the short term. Microsoft is big but not nearly big enough to stand up against a continent.
Re:If they did the next day Windows in EU would st (Score:3, Insightful)
For a few systems. They'd undoubtedly nail a few non-Europeans and piss them off, too. Then:
It's just a fantasy, anyway, but if the EU did stop enforcing Micro
Like I said MAD. (Score:3, Interesting)
In short term, you can run unpatched. That buys you time. Microsoft usually does not bother releasing patches until the threat is already in the wild, so no big loss here anyway - it already happened, I think it was the WMF hole, that a third-party developer released a wrap
Re:What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:2)
This has nothing to do with software patents. Microsoft was found guilty of (non-patent) monopoly abuses, and now is whining about being punished. If the EU is lucky, Microsoft will pick up all its marbles and leave. I would be very envious of the EU then.
Re:What the hell are the UC doing? (Score:2)
I agree, it doesn't, but I believe that patents are what MS will use in their future abuse. I just think the EC need to look forwards as well as back in how they deal with MS abuse. Punishing them for past abuses while granting them the weapons they need to crush their new competition is hardly a good use of EC time and money.
U.S. believe jurisdiction extends to EU... (Score:2)
Coming to Microsoft's aid or not, they are basically saying that they don't consider the EU responsible enough to make decisions on its own. It's like a gracious parent trying to help a child - except the US
Odd sequence (Score:3, Insightful)
The US courts told MS to go pound sand. [slashdot.org]
Try RTA.. (Score:3, Informative)
Took out the F, because I don't see the need to be rude..
Re:Try RTA.. (Score:2)
Re:Try RTA.. (Score:2)
Fairness (Score:2)
Unfair treatment of a US corporation... (Score:5, Funny)
I can see how that might be an issue.
Re:Unfair treatment of a US corporation... (Score:2)
A whole load of corruption was cleared out a few years back (almost entire departments resigning). The EU Commissioners do NOT need campaign contributions as they have no campaigns to run - they are politically appointed by the member state governments. A bit like the Secretary of State/Defense/etc in the USA - not voted for, but appointed by the boss.
Writing memos. (Score:3, Insightful)
B.S. Thy Name is Microsoft (Score:5, Insightful)
Thankfully the EU, so far, has told the U.S. (in some many words), to go F@$# itself. Rolling over is not the way to treat Microsoft. The EU has legitimate gripes with MS. MS failed to deliver documentation explaining one of their APIs, with which program can be made to work with Windows. This is gross negligence on MS's part.
The irony is it takes a foreign governmental body to discipline a mis-behaving U.S. company.
Oh Teddy Roosevelt where are you when we need you!
Re:B.S. Thy Name is Microsoft (Score:2)
No surprises there. There's nothing that annoys the average Eurocrat more than being told what to do by Americans, except possibly corruption inquiries. If the US government is seen to lean heavily on Brussels, then there'll be another trade war. Trade wars with the EU are extremely damaging - nobody gets killed, but some very rich people don't get even richer quite as quickly as they otherwise might, which is far more im
Success of the DOJ settlement? (Score:3, Insightful)
Well, which success are they speaking about? Has Microsoft monopolistic behaviour changed anyway since this "successfull" rulling has taken place? In some PR speech perhaps.
The DOJ settlement was only successfull for Microsoft, its shareholders, and for nobody else.
Has anybody heard of any positive effects it would have had?
I am not so sure the EU will buy such a weak argument. At least I hope it does not.
Re:Success of the DOJ settlement? (Score:4, Insightful)
Well, which success are they speaking about?
Why, of course it was a success. They managed to escape Judge Jackson's decision to have the company split and have it replaced by a joke. Then managed to also get rejected the objections Mass. raised to said joke. Overall, I'd say it was a huge success
Heh, this quote of Jackson's from wikipedia puts it clearly enough: Yet the DoJ rolled over and played dead. How's that for success?
Now, of course, they'd like the EU trial to be just as
everyone against MS (Score:4, Funny)
You would get paranoid too if everyone is against you.
-- AC because everyone is against me.
Re:everyone against MS (Score:2)
From the Article (Score:4, Funny)
Intercontinental ballistic chairs are on their way (Score:2)
Re:From the Article (Score:4, Funny)
Re:From the Article (Score:2)
Ballmer can't even throw his own chair! I mean COME ON!
Conflict of Interest (Score:4, Interesting)
Politicians may want to get involved but diplomats will not. Watch the days coming to see which politicos are dumping their Microsoft stock and that will give you a good idea of what is to come.
ward of the state? (Score:2, Funny)
Anonymous...unidentified...anonymity (Score:3, Insightful)
Is there anything that could possibly be more relaible than a story submitted by an anonymous reader about unidentified officials relayed by some anonymous person? That's about as iron-clad and trustwrthy as you can possibly get...
Seriously, I bash Microsoft about as much as any Mac user, but that summary was so free of content that it might as well have been penned by the bureaucrats of the Neutral Planet on Futurama.
It's probably counter productive (Score:5, Insightful)
Most likelly it will make no difference.
Possible it might actually make things worse for MS.
Additionally that they even asked just reinforces the widespread opinion here in Europe that the US administration (and by association the Americal people) believe that the whole world should play by made-in-US rules except themselfs.
Translation (Score:2)
We can't bribe the prosecution like we did back in the US!
European Microsoft Equv.? (Score:2)
Microsoft vs ???
Re: (Score:2)
Be fair and fine 'em 80 Billion (Score:4, Interesting)
I hate to be really cruel, but if they really wanted to pound it into MS that they've been bad, they'd set up a percentage to be used funding open source government software solutions for nearly ever level of EU government. Actually, in several respects it makes sense for the EU to do that anyway just to stick to a US company and use the money to fund domestic EU programing groups.
I'd actually be shocked if MS didn't try to use the US government to get around other government's fines if at all possible. Part of me wants to say that it would be a bad idea preventing/limiting the sale of MS OS and Office apps in the EU, but then there is the other part of me that says that the EU has just as many able programmers as the US and should be able to come up with their own EU version of MS in 3-5 years. I'd also be interested if India or China developed their own OS and/or office products. Both markets should be able to support a lively local OS/Office suite.
Re:Be fair and fine 'em 80 Billion (Score:3, Interesting)
I agree with your points except for this one statement. There are a lot more anti-trust cases going on in the US and the EU, and I'm pretty sure the US could retaliate by blocking the activities of European firms in the US. In fact, I think this is already going on. Everyone has noticed the souring of US/EU relations, and sadly I think it is showing up in some anti-trust cases.
I had a
Should the EU express "concerns" about US motives? (Score:5, Insightful)
As far as I can see, the DOJ did not drop the case for juridical reasons, but for political ones. As in the new adminstration didn't want this case to go any further.
Why might one ask? Well ... one consideration might be that on the whole it wouldn't be in the US interest at all to see its great software champion cut up into "Opsco" and "Appsco" (an Operating System division and an Application Software division). So that competition laws would have to take a backseat to National Interest (which certainly would be a legitimate point of view). I'm sure though that conspiracy theorists could come up with other, less savory, alternatives.
Therefore, err ..., might the EU be justified in expressing "substantial concerns" about "US" motives for having such 'substantial concerns about the whether Microsoft is being treated fairly'?
My second point is that this whole charade began 2 years ago. In 2004. After Microsoft was found guilty of violating EU competition laws and was ordered to disclose publish the API's that allow Windows Clients to interact with Windows Servers, so as to allow others (SUN, IBM, HP, and Samba) to make their OS act as Windows Server to Windows Clients and to allow their clients to log into Windows Servers.
Does that seem reasonsable? I think it does. Because if that sort of inter-operability isn't available then anyone trying to sell a competitor to Windows Server will have to convince their prospect that their (ubiquitous) Windows desktop machines will be running crippled when logging in to their proposed servers. And because anyone pushing Linux desktops will have to explain why it isn't important that they won't be able to work well with their prospect's (widely used) Windows Servers. Either way Microsoft would be using its current monopoly position as a competitive weapon, which is illegal.
Therefore requiring the API's to be published, open, and usable sounds like honest enforcement of competition laws to me. Now Microsoft had 2 whole years to come up with the required documentation.
And what did Microsoft do? They:
Now does that sound as if they were trying to comply with a reasonable request or if they were just trying to get things done their way? I think the latter.
And now that they seem to have lost traction in the EU courts and have reached the deadline they chant that "fines are not the solution" and bring in their big brother to apply some pressure. Well ... it would be a good stunt if they get can away with it, but I'm not sure if this is something we should be happy with.
Re:Should the EU express "concerns" about US motiv (Score:2)
1) The DOJ did not drop its case against Microsoft. MS was proven guilty and punishment was handed out. Whether you agree with the settlement terms is a subject for a different debate.
2) Judge Jacksion was removed from the bench for discussing an on-going case with the media. E
Re:Should the EU express "concerns" about US motiv (Score:3, Insightful)
To uphold the law?
Prosecutors felt they had enough evidence. Last I heard, a bad economy was not a defense against criminal behavior.
Re:Should the EU express "concerns" about US motiv (Score:2)
Summary of being "fair" (Score:5, Insightful)
What MS are after is the same fair treatment that received in US courts, they find it unbelievable that they should actually have to PROVE compliance with a courts decisions and that being found as a monopoly engaged in deliberately predatory approaches should have any punishment doesn't make sense for an organisation used to dealing with the good ole DoJ.
Its quite simply ridiculous that the EU should find a company guilty of being a monopoly that uses that position to crush its opposition AND THEN require the company to change its behaviour. This is a very childish position for the EU to take in this globalised era, sure it might have been okay back with Standard Oil and Bell to force monopolies to change, but that was a different time when goverments actually had some say in how the world worked.
The EU should clearly back down, pay Microsoft compensation for wasting their time, sign software patents into Law and give Microsoft the job of validating them.
Its either that or Microsoft would have to operate legally.
Before asking for fairness, know the justice (Score:2)
So what is "fair" first of all depends on the justice system you're dealing with.
Now, if you don't want to deal with a justice from some country, stay away from it. It IS actually that simple.
Re:Before asking for fairness, know the justice (Score:2)
One expensive memo (Score:2, Informative)
LXer: How Microsoft wastes its money on anything but software
http://lxer.com/module/newswire/view/55497/index.h tml [lxer.com]
Election 2004: How to Excel in DC
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0438/040922_news _microsoft.php [seattleweekly.com]
A Bug in Windows GOP (Seattle Weekly)
http://www.seattleweekly.com/news/0522/050601_ [seattleweekly.com]
Neelie will not give in under pressure (Score:3, Informative)
I think Microsoft knows by know she will not give in so they are trying other ways to get it's own way. She will be fair. She will make Microsoft to do what she told them to do. And it is clear Microsoft doesn't like that at all.
Nyh
Re:Old news already (Score:2, Informative)
This has nothing to do with the judges decision, this is about US diplomats not judges.
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:5, Insightful)
I think you suffer from a serious prospective problem. You sound like my 5 year old cousin whining after he gets caught.. "but he hit me first". Just because they have done Bad Things(TM) in the past doesn't give anyone the right to do Bad Things(TM) to them in the present. Their hearing should be fair... and I don't think it's too much to ask. The entire point of "freedom" and "liberty" is that things are fair for all, even those with whom we disagree... cheering and hoping for injustice against your opponents is borderline facism.
That being said, until I get something other then vague generalities about "documents", it's going to be impossible to convince me that anything unfair is actually occurring.
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:2, Offtopic)
Someone should teach this child, and you apparantly, about the idea of "Self Defense". "But he hit me first" IS a valid defense. Get this kid in a martial arts class before your family turns him in to an overweight pussy. The exercise, self confidence, and perhaps most importantly -- skill to control his abilities -- will prove incredibly valuable.
~Rebecca
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:2)
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:3, Insightful)
Umm, "Self Defense" is always a valid defense, regardless of the size/type of the weapons of your opponents. "Self Defense" refers to whether you should punish the victim, like the GP apparantly feels about his cousin.
You can make an argument about escalating violence, but in general you are justified in self defense for raising the violence level by one degree.
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:2)
At some point, however, somebody righteous has to fight against somebody wicked, or only the wicked shall wield any power.
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:2)
"But he hit me first" IS a valid defense.
Haven't spent much time around five year-olds, have you? In any situation of this sort when you dig into the details you find that while A hit B first, it was only after B pushed A down, which was only after A threw a nerf ball at B's chest, which was after B called A a "stupidhead" which was after A... you get the idea. If you follow it all the way to the root cause (assuming the kids remember, which they usually don't) that the culpability is mutual.
As a da
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, but...
That being said, until I get something other then vague generalities about "documents", it's going to be impossible to convince me that anything unfair is actually occurring.
Exactly. They are being treated fairly. They just claim that they aren't. Just their latest attempt at making the EU fall over like the US did. They hope that somewhere, someone will whisper in the right ears that after those accusations, the punishment should not be too stiff, because it would confirm the (baseless) accusations.
Diplomatic games, that's all.
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:3, Insightful)
Don't AGREE to exchange them for priviledges.
When Microsoft BEGGED PERMISSION to operate a business in a particular jusridiction, THEY AGREED to abide by the REGULATIONS therein.
NOW "THE RULES" are too onerous? Boo Fucking Hoo, and Caveat Emptor, MSFT...
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:2, Interesting)
This is the penalty phase of their antitrust trial. This is MS corporate whining it's not faaaaaiiiiiiirrrrrrr at the extent of their punishment.
No, it's intemperate mockery.
Racist, totalitarian, militant ... you can be all of those and not be fascist. The defining characteristic of fascism is the
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Run run as fast as you can, you can't catch me. (Score:2)
Re:Run as fast as you can, you can't catch me... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Run as fast as you can, you can't catch me... (Score:2)
Re:Run as fast as you can, you can't catch me... (Score:2)
Re:Why not (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft: If you can't beat em, buy em
Government: Bomb em first, then try to beat em.
MS + Government: If you can't beat em, bomb em.
Re:Fair? Sure~! (Score:2)
Re:The world marketplace... (Score:2)
Re:Please BillG - (Score:2)