Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

News for nerds, stuff that matters

Slashdot Log In

Log In

Create Account  |  Retrieve Password

EU Prepared to Fine Microsoft $2.5 Million Per Day

Posted by Zonk on Tue Jun 27, 2006 11:48 AM
from the i'd-get-on-that-guys dept.
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."
+ -
story

Related Stories

[+] Microsoft Source Code Still Not Enough for EU? 337 comments
wjsteele writes "The BBC is reporting that Microsoft's offer to allow rivals access to its software blueprint may not be enough to prevent European Union action." From the article: "Its offer to open up its software blueprints 'underscored its commitment' to meet the European Commission's demands, Horacio Gutierrez associate general counsel for Microsoft Europe said in a statement. However, Brussels has warned the offer may not go far enough. 'It would be premature to conclude that offering access to source codes would necessarily resolve the problem of compliance," said EU anti-trust spokesman Jonathan Todd.'
[+] 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 Says Microsoft Still Not Compliant 339 comments
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. "
[+] 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 Makes EU Dispute Docs Public 227 comments
mjdroner writes "ZDNet is reporting that Microsoft has posted confidential documents used in its defense of European Commission antitrust practices related to server software. Explaining the posting of the documents, which the EC considers confidential, a Microsoft rep said, 'Transparency is vitally important in what can be a very opaque process in Brussels.'"
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
More
Loading... please wait.
  • Bundle? I lol'd (Score:5, Interesting)

    by voice_of_all_reason (926702) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @11:51AM (#15613082)
    change how they bundle Media Player.

    I don't think you can bundle anything more than making it completely uninstallable.

    //open to pointers on how to excise MP10 from my new machine completely.
  • Respect (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Tom (822) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @11:52AM (#15613092) Homepage Journal
    It's all a questions of respect. The US government barked, but when it came to biting, they didn't. As a result, MS does not and will probably not ever again have respect for them.

    Apparently, someone in the EU has some soft skills and knows that at this stage it isn't about being right or wrong or fair or blablabla. If the EU doesn't bite after making so much noise about it, they'll have a hard time ever getting MS to comply with anything.

  • by LodCrappo (705968) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @11:56AM (#15613117) Homepage
    So they fine MS... assuming MS actually pays (seems kind of unlikely), what are they going to do with the cash? I RTFA and it didn't mention it. I'd love to see it go to aiding the folks that MS's anticompetitive tactics have hampered, but how would that work? Or would they give it to charity, use it to lower taxes a tiny bit, something positive for people?
  • Clarification (Score:5, Informative)

    by UnknowingFool (672806) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @11:58AM (#15613134)

    Under that ruling, Microsoft must open up parts of their operating system to competitors, and change how they bundle Media Player.

    Just for clarification before anyone gets on their soapbox about how Microsoft shouldn't have to open their code to competitors, that is not the parts that the EU wants. They want MS to dislose API type information so that competitors can better interface with Windows. i.e. Samba.

  • Dear EU, (Score:5, Funny)

    by Opportunist (166417) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @11:58AM (#15613135)
    Thank you for fining us. Enclosed you find our offer about Windows Vista special EU edition, the ONLY edition the EU parlament and its associated organs may use. A license costs 2*10^6 USD a day.

    Or, could we talk that fine thing over, maybe?

    (it's fun to have a monopoly, ain't it?)
  • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:02PM (#15613165)

    "Microsoft must open up parts of their operating system to competitors, and change how they bundle Media Player."

    This is ambiguous and misleading commentary. MS has been ordered to document the APIs of the interaction between their monopoly desktop OS and their non-monopoly server OS to allow competition. This is not "opening up" any part of their OS. They have not been asked to provide any source code and in fact they offered source code as an alternative to the documentation (under terms that would have gutted the benefits of the punishment) and it was rejected as unsatisfactory. To reiterate, MS was not ordered to open up any code, only to provide documentation on the interaction of their OS's.

  • by Nagus (146351) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:42PM (#15613495) Homepage
    TFA didn't say it, but other sources [betanews.com] do:

    The fine will be applied retroactively from December 15th.

    This means on July 12, they will need to pay 209 * 2.0M EUR = 418.000.000 EUR, or 524.339.200 USD. Following that initial payment, they will continue to pay 2 million EUR each day.

    It doesn't state anywhere whether the fine applies only to business days, or also to weekends and holidays. I've assumed it also applies to weekends and holidays since the laws are just as applicable on these days as on any other day.
    • I think it was at least a year ago that the EU would fine microsoft every day.

      Scratch that. If I RTFA, I would know that that was exactly what they said in 2004.
    • Spare the rod... (Score:5, Insightful)

      by Infonaut (96956) <infonaut@gmail.com> on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:03PM (#15613175) Homepage Journal

      ... spoil the megacorp.

      Seriously, it seems that the entire history of antitrust action against MS in the US and Europe has been a colossal waste of time and effort. All it has done is show that governments don't really have the teeth to cut into Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior. I originally thought the DOJ action was going to curb MS, but it didn't.

      When push came to shove, the US government wasn't truly prepared to make one of the crown jewels of American business suffer in order to make it change its ways. The EU is likely unwilling to push too hard for fear of invoking the wrath of the US government, which is just further proof that if a business becomes big enough, it can only very rarely be constrained by government.

      Market forces are doing a far better job of constraining Microsoft. Perhaps if Microsoft's competitors hadn't relied on antitrust lawsuits to save them, they might have fought MS more aggressively and effectively in the past. Apple learned its lesson. Sun (belatedly) learned its lesson. The lesson is that the government isn't going to help you fight Microsoft, so you have to figure out a way to do it yourself.

      • by Cleon (471197) <cleon42@@@yahoo...com> on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:25PM (#15613354) Homepage
        I don't think it's lack of teeth, it's lack of will.

        In the US case, the justice department got a conviction against Microsoft. Then the Bush administration was sworn in, and the incoming DOJ whittled the punishment down into a "don't do it again, *wink* *wink*, *nudge* *nudge*."

        In the European case, the EU is still finding its legs as an entity/pseudo-government. Any action they take against MS is going to be debated, re-debated, whined about, etc. They have the teeth, it's a question of whether they have the will to take a bite.
      • by Foofoobar (318279) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @01:02PM (#15613705)
        Seriously, it seems that the entire history of antitrust action against MS in the US and Europe has been a colossal waste of time and effort. All it has done is show that governments don't really have the teeth to cut into Microsoft's anti-competitive behavior


        It's not that they don't have the teeth... it's that they don't have the BALLS! And sad to say, Europe is showing it has a helluva lot more balls than the US. Of course, this is mainly because lobbying is an industry of corruption here in the US. I'm honestly amazed that the EU hasn't been bought off yet or bribed into submission.
      • "Despite how much I dislike MS..."

        I'm the same way, not a fan at all, but, I do wonder at what point, what would prevent MS from basically thumbing their nose at EU, and saying fine, we'll just withdraw all new products from you market...and if things got worse, just plain stop supporting the products currently out there in EU.

        I would not guess it would be good for business, but, if MS has that much cash they're sitting on, and still can do business with the rest of the world...what would stop them from pulling this, and using that to leverage the EU into getting off their ass about this?

        Sure, while it would seriously promote alternate OSes in EU, could the EU stand to have the carpet pulled out from under them in this manner considering how entrenched MS is in the world of computing..?

    • by RonnyJ (651856) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @11:58AM (#15613132)
      If it was, I would imagine they'd have started imposing these fines many months ago - the original ruling was made in March 2004.
    • by Richard W.M. Jones (591125) <richNO@SPAMannexia.org> on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:03PM (#15613172) Homepage

      What are the chances of this being simply an excuse to generate a $2.5 million per day revenue stream for the EU government?

      Errrm, none? There is no "EU government" - perhaps you meant intergovernmental European Union, or the European Council, Commission or Parliament?

      The EU has a budget of over 1% of the European GDP (works out at around US$ 160 billion). Why would they want $2.5m/day?

      Rich.

    • Re:Serious Question: (Score:5, Informative)

      by Tim C (15259) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:06PM (#15613200)
      There is no "EU government". Further, the EU annual budget dwarves a paltry $2.5m/day; while more money is always good, there's no need to create spurious conspiracy theories.

      The EU is merely taking the sort of corrective measures the US DoJ should have taken a long, long time ago. I fail to see how a company that's been convicted of a crime can go unpunished for so long.
    • by Bogtha (906264) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:08PM (#15613205)

      If that were the case, they'd be making it as difficult as possible for Microsoft to comply with their demands instead of telling them exactly what they are doing wrong and giving them years to correct their mistake.

      I know it's trendy to accuse the EU of being greedy and anti-American, and I don't deny that the money will be happily spent, but that doesn't mean Microsoft isn't breaking the law and it doesn't mean the EU aren't right to fine them.

      Microsoft could easily avoid these fines by complying with the court ruling. They have chosen to make every effort to avoid doing so, and these fines are the result.

      • by absurdist (758409) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:17PM (#15613271)
        "Microsoft is headquartered in the US. I don't think the EU has the authority to simply demand money from them."

        Microsoft is a multi-national conglomerate doing business in many nations around the world. As such, they are requires to obey the laws and accept the sanctions imposed by every country or, in the case of the EU, group of countries they do business in.

        "Sure, they can kick 'em out of the country, but MS should call their bluff."

        Sure they should. Then the EU should simply impound all of MS's European assets, and strip them of all patent and copyright protection, thus allowing Europeans to install their new open source, free operating system quite legally under the laws of the EU.

        When you grow up you'll realize that there are other countries, legal systems, and ways of looking at things than the US's. BTW, as I pointed out before, the EU is a GROUP of countries... your statement about "kick them out of the country" berely underscores your ignorance.

        But thanks for playing.
        • by Anonymous Brave Guy (457657) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @01:01PM (#15613701)
          Microsoft is a multi-national conglomerate doing business in many nations around the world.

          Indeed. Moreover, a lot of people from the US who lurk around here don't seem to appreciate how small their market is compared to the rest of the world. The US may have the world's single biggest national economy (though not by far, depending on the metric you use) but compared to, say, Europe as a whole, it's not so much. Losing most or all of its European income would basically kill Microsoft overnight. Of course, in the current economic climate, it could also trigger the freefall meltdown that the world economy is in grave danger of falling into any time now. :-(

    • by Professor_UNIX (867045) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @11:59AM (#15613141)
      If I did my math right, isn't that like 9-something-billion per year in fines? And doesn't MS generate something like 40 billion per year in revenue? I say they won't even notice....
      No, it's $912,500,000 a year in fines. I would say Microsoft doesn't *like* to throw away a billion dollars a year on fines, but it certainly wouldn't put them out of business.
    • by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF (813746) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:09PM (#15613213)

      I guess I'm looking for trouble by saying this on Slashdot, but I think the EU's reasoning on this issue is faulty, and I think it's an old-fashioned money grab.

      They're breaking the law. The US convicted them of it. The EU did too. So did several other nations. They have failed to comply with their punishment. If the EU does not act, they are stating to the world that they won't or can't enforce their own laws. For a fledgling organization like the EU, this would be devastating. If you convict someone of robbery and they escape from the prison instead of serving their time and then stroll into town and tell everyone they aren't going to accept the punishment since they don't want to, the law bloody well better act if they want to be taken seriously, ever.

      Good thing I'm not in charge of Microsoft. Out of spite I'd have pulled up stakes of everything in the EU, save for a distribution warehouse.

      Yeah, because you'd be fired and replaced within hours.

      • by Petersko (564140) on Tuesday June 27 2006, @12:29PM (#15613386)
        They're breaking the law. The US convicted them of it. The EU did too. So did several other nations. They have failed to comply with their punishment. If the EU does not act, they are stating to the world that they won't or can't enforce their own laws.

        What the rest of the world did or did not decide is irrelevant. What I disagree with is the "failed to comply" portion. After reading both sides (including those long-winded PDF submissions from both sides), I think the EU's original demands were unclear to the point of unusability, and that Microsoft, in this case, has actually strived to comply. I think the EU has made a game of making Microsoft "guess", and then saying, "BZZT! WRONG! We didn't mean that, but we're not going to clarify much either. Try again. Oh, and your time is up."