EU antitrust boss wins my pick in '08 Oscar race

"And next time, don't forget to eat your vegetables--or else!"

News.com Poll

Money matters
The EU's $1.35 billion fine for Microsoft is:

too much
too little
just right

View results

The Academy Awards show is over and done with, but European Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes is making a strong bid to win an Oscar as "Best Supporting Scold."

The EU's regulatory czar has socked Microsoft with an 899 million euro ($1.35 billion) fine for failing to comply with a March 2004 antitrust ruling and for charging "unreasonable" prices to rivals seeking documentation for workgroup servers. In the statement from the European Union, Kroes singled out Microsoft as the first company in the last half-century of EU regulation fined for failing to comply with an antitrust mandate:

"I hope that today's Decision closes a dark chapter in Microsoft's record of non-compliance with the Commission's March 2004 Decision and that the principles confirmed by the Court of First Instance ruling of September 2007 will govern Microsoft's future conduct."

Steve Ballmer's not looking to reprise the role of industry bully. Remember the blowback after his "the hell with Janet Reno" yowl in the late 1990s? He will write the check and order his legions to move on.

Neelie Kroes

(Credit: European Community)

There's not enough upside to fight Kroes over what, for Redmond at least, is essentially chump change. Besides, he's anxious to gain EU goodwill for Microsoft's pledge last week to open up its APIs and protocols. The idea was to foster the impression that Microsoft was trying to be more open and not impede rivals seeking to make their products more compatible.

And, of course, to get Kroes off its back.

The EU is within its rights to wield a big stick. Whether this really was necessary is another story. While U.S. regulators took a powder when the Bush team took over the Justice Department, European trustbusters remained aggressive and actually forced changes in Microsoft's behavior (or at least got Redmond's braintrust to sign off on paper).

But pouring salt on the wound--and that's what it is--doesn't change anything on the ground. Microsoft's already paid big fines, and so now it will pay another one. Kroes made her point for the cameras and guaranteed a boatload of press attention over the next 24 hours.

[drhowarddrfine]

Does it do any good? When you break the law, the judge can slap your wrist. Then you get fined. Then you get locked up. Microsoft better hope they don't get locked up or locked out from Europe next time.

[tundraboy]

I am thankful that at least one antitrust authority is standing up to Microsoft after the U.S. Justice Department basically walked away with its tail tucked in at the behest of the Bushies.

You don't seem to get it. Microsoft is a predatory monopolist. It is today's version of Standard Oil. And it continues to wield it's market power to illegally swat competitors aside. It's four years now and it still hasn't completely or effectively complied with the remedies it agreed to implement 4 years ago. And we still don't know if it's current embrace of 'openness' is just another smokescreen.

The consent decree allowing the US courts to monitor Microsoft's behaviour was extended for a couple of years but it will eventually end. You think Microsoft will not drift back to it's old ways of using coercive, illegal means to eliminate its' competitors? I don't think you're that naive.

[Vegaman_Dan]

And if MS gets 'locked up' or 'locked out' from Europe, who does that punish really? I would think the consumers in Europe should have a say in this, but the EU isn't about consumer interest.

[MTGrizzly]

Who gets punished by MS being kicked out of Europe? Certainly not the consumers. Not only is MS anti-competitive, they make lousy products - as monopolies are prone to do. It would be terrible, (for MS that is), to see a whole continent go to open source software, wouldn't it... [heavy sarcasm here]

It will never happen, of course, but one can dream...

[farlinax]

This is ridiculous - go look up the definition of a monopoly. There ARE alternatives to Microsoft. The very fact that Microsoft owns a majority of the market encourages innovation by competitors (open source, etc).

I encourage you to turn off your monitors and pick up an economics 101 textbook.

[farlinax]

and I meant that to the general comments... not yours MTGrizzly :)

[georgiarat]

Even in the US where Microsoft has products available for other systems (Office for Mac) the new version will not translate documents from Office 2007 to Office for Mac 2008. They also have not developed translators for Office to Mac 2004. In the meantime Apple had translators for Office 2007 to its own products Pages, Numbers, Keynote last fall. One would believe Microsoft would have ensured the new version of Office in January would have had plenty of time to incorporate the translators. They did not and one can guess why. To make it as difficult as possible for the Mac to integrate for customers. Once again they use their near monopoly position to affect the market.

[Newspeak finder]

The message is simple to all US companies.

Your predatory days are over.

To every company it is now totally obvious. If you want to sell in the EU obey our laws or get out.