• On TechRepublic: Five super-secret features in Windows 7
January 16, 2009 12:02 PM PST

EU objects to browser in Windows

by Dawn Kawamoto

Updated at 8:33 a.m. PST January 17, with comments from Opera and antitrust attorneys in Brussels.

European regulators notified Microsoft it believes the software giant is in violation of the region's antitrust laws by bundling its Internet Explorer browser in Windows, the company said Friday.

The European Commission, which received that Microsoft was using its market dominance in bundling IE into the Windows operating system, opened its investigation into the tying issue last January.

According to a statement issued by the European Commission:

The evidence gathered during the investigation leads the Commission to believe that the tying of Internet Explorer with Windows, which makes Internet Explorer available on 90 percent of the world's PCs, distorts competition on the merits between competing web browsers insofar as it provides Internet Explorer with an artificial distribution advantage which other web browsers are unable to match.

The Commission is concerned that through the tying, Microsoft shields Internet Explorer from head to head competition with other browsers which is detrimental to the pace of product innovation and to the quality of products which consumers ultimately obtain.

In addition, the Commission is concerned that the ubiquity of Internet Explorer creates artificial incentives for content providers and software developers to design websites or software primarily for Internet Explorer which ultimately risks undermining competition and innovation in the provision of services to consumers.

A spokesman for the commission declined to comment on whether there has been any discussion on whether Microsoft would offer a version of Windows with the browser and one without, much like it did after the Commission ordered it to separate its Windows Media Player from its operating system and offer a version with and without the operating system.

A spokesman for Microsoft declined to comment, noting it would not make statements beyond its press release.

Microsoft, in response to the Commission's statement of objections, said:

We are committed to conducting our business in full compliance with European law. We are studying the Statement of Objections now.

Microsoft will have two months to respond in writing to the European Commission's objections and also will be given an opportunity to request an oral hearing. After assessing Microsoft's written and/or oral response, the commission will issue a final decision on the matter, which could include a fine, an enforcement order, or a remedy.

Microsoft, meanwhile, further noted in its statement that the commission indicated in its "statement of objections" that the remedies put in place by the U.S. courts in 2002, following antitrust proceedings in Washington, D.C., do not make the inclusion of Internet Explorer in Windows lawful under European Union law.

In reacting to the commission's objections, rival browser maker Opera applauded the move.

"We think it is right of the EU for the sake of the consumers to be concerned about someone potentially misusing their competitive power," Chief Development Officer Christen Krogh told CNET News.

Antitrust attorneys in private practice in Brussels said the commission's "statement of objections," is not a light matter and is likely to pose challenges for the software giant.

David Anderson, an antitrust attorney and partner with Berwin Leighton Paisner in Brussels, said, "The commission's continued pursuit of Microsoft's tying of its operating system to Media Player and now Internet Explorer sends a clear signal to dominant companies in Europe: the commission is serious about exclusionary tying and bundling."

Anderson added, however, that if the commission ultimately requires Microsoft to offer a version of Windows with and without IE bundled in, pricing will play a key role.

The commission won the battle but lost the war on its Media Player order, said some antitrust experts. Microsoft was able to offer versions of Windows with and without the Media Player for the same price and, as a result, computer makers and users loaded the Windows version with the Media Player.

But while pricing may be a key issue if the commission opts to require Microsoft to unbundle IE, European antitrust regulators may be reluctant to demand such an order because it would require them to set pricing, and enforce and monitor adherence to the order, Anderson said.

One well-informed antitrust lawyer in private practice in Brussels said the commission would not likely require Microsoft to unbundle IE from the operating system, since that remedy did not work well with the Media Player.

Instead, the commission may consider proposing that Microsoft offer more than one browser with its operating system, noted the antitrust attorney.

And although some antitrust attorneys say they expect similar tying cases to arise with the commission and Microsoft, this antitrust attorney disagrees.

"The commission will only go after the really important applications that result in platform monopoly maintenance, in the long term," said the antitrust attorney.

The attorney cited Microsoft's Windows, IE, and Office, as well as its server operating software, as examples of a platform monopoly. And, more recently, the attorney said Microsoft is looking to the Internet as its next platform for Web applications that will be made dependent upon Windows to run and look their best.

The European Committee for Interoperable Systems raised the same issue, noting in a statement:

By tying Internet Explorer to Windows and using proprietary IE standards, and making Web applications and Web content dependent on Silverlight and .Net, Microsoft seeks to establish itself as the Web's gatekeeper.

Meanwhile, Anderson noted that Microsoft may also face an emboldened commission staff, given the same set of attorneys who won the Media Player case before the European Court of First Instance are the same ones overseeing the IE issue.

Dawn Kawamoto covers enterprise security and financial news relating to technology for CNET News. E-mail Dawn.
advertisement
 
Business supplies and services can get expensive. Get smart spending tips and learn about new cost-saving opportunities for your business
Recent posts from Microsoft
Windows 7 sales outshine Vista
FAQ: Buying the right Windows 7 upgrade
Microsoft Courier: Photos of the leaked interface
Microsoft cuts 800 more jobs
Microsoft gives the MSN butterfly a makeover
Microsoft chops price of its hosted software
Windows 7 upgrade version: The dos and don'ts
Windows 7 usage growing quickly
Add a Comment (Log in or register) Showing 1 of 2 pages (62 Comments)
by getwired January 16, 2009 12:21 PM PST
<FACEPALM>

Give me a break.
Reply to this comment
by sweetchinmusic January 16, 2009 12:37 PM PST
Seriously Opera?

I love the Opera browser and I think its fantastic. They've had better features than even Firefox for a long time. But seriously, you (Opera) need to come up with better marketing strategies rather than use the Microsoft-hating-EU-commission to try to unbundle IE from Windows. Lets face it - if IE does get unbundled, given the current market share and popularity, Firefox will probably be the one people download, or Chrome... not Opera. By the way, I hope you won't go after Apple and ask for Safari to be unbundled too! Wake up Opera, and do something constructive, because, like I said, you have a very good browser.
Reply to this comment
by rage-demon January 17, 2009 12:56 PM PST
Can someone please tell me how you're supposed to download an internet browser IF YOU DON"T HAVE A WAY TO BROWSE THE INTERNET?! We'll all have to start buying Firefox on CDs at the store. I mean seriously, this is beyond stupid. What next? "Comet Cusror applauds the EU's antitrust lawsuit over Windows bundling of a mouse pointer..." then what, keyboard support?? (Yes, i know keyboard support is motherboard based, but i'm just making a point at how idiotic this whole thing is.)

And seriously, how is any of this different than what Apple does?

The worst part about this is that there are many computer illiterate people who would have no idea what to do. If you tell them they have to get their own browsers or media players, how would they know which ones to get to ensure a safe, stable, and compatible operating environment?
by b3nw January 16, 2009 12:38 PM PST
" Opera also alleged Microsoft made interoperability difficult but forgoing accepted open Web standards."

typo? by forgoing?
Reply to this comment
by Sausagebiscuit January 16, 2009 6:44 PM PST
careful pointing out typos, I got bashed big time for doing it in another article! lol. Honestly, however, good catch!
by russkeller January 16, 2009 12:40 PM PST
Well the Monopoly bought the US DoJ now they need to buy the EU,. Big deal they can afford it.
Reply to this comment
by Lerianis January 17, 2009 10:00 PM PST
Microsoft does not have a monopoly because they bought the US DoJ, and they don't really have a monopoly at all. The only reason they are the biggest person out there in terms of OS's is: 1. They have no real competition, 2. Apple won't compete against them in reality, 3. Linux is too hard for people to learn, and 4. Windows XP, Vista, 7 have 'built a better mousetrap' or OS as the case may be.
by eadeguzman January 16, 2009 12:57 PM PST
That's ok... as long as the EU will mandate all OS makers to not include a browser.

EU simply doesn't understand it. There are some configurations and tools on the Windows or other OS that can only be managed through a web browser... How about setting up your router for example?

In that case, you need to download FireFox to access your router.. but wait, you don't have Internet connection yet!
Reply to this comment
by rapier1 January 16, 2009 1:29 PM PST
I'd love to see how people would react to the EU requiring Apple not to include Safari.
by smilin:) January 16, 2009 1:38 PM PST
rapier1 you have the best post here.
by FireFox_User January 16, 2009 1:50 PM PST
LOL... rapier1... good one. Just wish that the Mac fan-boys won't tried to track you down. Their god father is now leave of absence and they need someone like you to spend their energy...

LOL
by chris_d January 16, 2009 2:06 PM PST
Fine with me. I don't use Safari anyway. And if I wanted to, I could download it.
by chris_d January 16, 2009 12:59 PM PST
Microsoft should just give up. Their browser is years behind everything else out there. They're dragging the whole internet down... but maybe that's the point. Maybe they think that if they make a browser that's just barely good enough, people won't switch browsers, and that will make advanced web apps less attractive, which certainly benefits Microsoft. If Javascript performance keeps improving, how are they going to push windows-centric stuff like activex and silverlight? Their aim seems to be keeping as many users as possible on a browser that's dog slow for anything more than a simple web page.
Reply to this comment
by karpenterskids January 16, 2009 1:50 PM PST
That's not true at all...Internet Explorer is a VERY decent browser.
(Definitely beats Opera, at the very least)
by DrtyDogg January 16, 2009 1:52 PM PST
I like IE, on a fresh install it gives me an easy way to get chrome and firefox.
by jmfb_k7 January 16, 2009 1:04 PM PST
Hey, I was doing some research and I noticed Microsoft also includes a Logical Disk Manager service that mounts hard drives. I think this seriously undermines the software programmers trying to market their own disk managment services. They should sue Microsoft for it.


In the end, windows will only be able to be a DOS, as including any other services doesnt give people a fair chance of marketing their B.S.
Reply to this comment
by Throgged January 16, 2009 1:40 PM PST
lol, this made me chuckle.
agreed btw
by Penguinisto January 16, 2009 1:05 PM PST
Simple rules, folks. You want to play in the EU, you get to abide by their rules. Don't like it? Deal with it.

The OEM can drop-in whatever browser they want, and it would skirt the whole issue.

Either way? Their sandbox, their rules. If MSFT doesn't like it, they can leave at any time.
Reply to this comment
by ranpha January 17, 2009 2:09 AM PST
If other OSes is not subjected to the same rules, then Microsoft can go to Court of First Instance and demolish the antitrust suit.

It is nice for everyone to play by the same rules, but one rule for Microsoft and another rule for Linux/OSX/BSD, that will not be acceptable.

This is EU that makes consumers pay more money as a consequence of their BSkyB antitrust suit, thus I will never believe in them.
by dhavleak January 17, 2009 3:25 AM PST
Penguin -- easy on the celebration there.. you might hurt yourself doing cartwheels..
by Penguinisto January 17, 2009 8:06 AM PST
I merely think it amusing.

Also, there is only one rule, and "other OSes" actually adhere to it; Apple skirts it by selling hardware (which puts them in a different industry entirely), and by not embedding Safari into OSX to the point where removal would cripple the OS itself. If they included Firefox, they'd be all set. Linux adheres to the rule nicely by offering the user a wide number of browser choices during installation.
by dhavleak January 17, 2009 10:03 PM PST
No really -- stop trying to mask your glee...
by Vegaman_Dan January 19, 2009 1:45 PM PST
The problem with your comments, Penguinisto, is that that those same rules the EU is using do not apply fairly to all parties.

Windows comes with IE bundled.

OS X comes with Safari bundled.

Unless the EU goes after Apple for doing the exact same thing, then they have a doublestandard and it's one that Microsoft can toss at the EU for unfair trade practices. They could even point at Google's Chrome as being bundled with other Google products, or that Quicktime comes bundled with iTunes. There's a lot of bundling going on out there and the EU's decision to go after one company for what is commonplace in the industry today smacks of their targeted agenda against Microsoft.

The OEM can drop whatever they want in the machines now. But the box sales of the OS do not have that option. OS X doesn't either.

It could be considered discrimination. There's all sorts of ways to look at this and not a single one of them benefits anyone other than the EU itself.

Your agument about Apple getting around the issue by selling OS X with the hardware- you just shot your own argument right there. OS X come *BUNDLED* with the hardware. Yes, that's right, you don't get a choice of Linux, Windows, or any other OS other than OS X when you power up that Mac. See, that's the argument the EU has right there and you've just demonstrated it perfectly why it doesn't work.

Please don't try using the hardware argument again- it's been busted.
by eadeguzman January 16, 2009 1:12 PM PST
I might be completely wrong, but it sure looks like another attempt by the EU to milk yet again another successful US company.

Not sure if Google or Apple should celebrate on this...
Reply to this comment
by Lerianis January 17, 2009 10:05 PM PST
I have to agree. The fact is that, in totally opposition to Penguinisto's remarks, some rules are not sane, not salient, and should have never been passed in the first place.
This ruling against Microsoft is one of them, to be blunt. They are expecting Microsoft to deal by different rules than everyone else, and it's time for that to stop and realize that there is nothing wrong with Microsoft including their own web browser, media player, etc. in the OS.
If people REALLY want a different on...... they will find a way to get on the internet and get a different one, as I did!
I love Microsoft products.... but I'll still say that there are better media players than Windows Media Player out there, KMPlayer to be specific.
Same thing for IE7/8,...... Firefox and Chrome are somewhat better than them right now, so I use BOTH those latter two right now (seeing which is faster in day to day use and more secure).
by arbulus January 16, 2009 1:15 PM PST
I simply cannot get behind this at all. I do not see any issue with bundling a browser. EVERY operating system does. Why aren't they going after Apple or Linux vendors?

People need browsers. Even if you don't want to use IE, you have to have a browser to get to the web to download another browser. Browsers aren't sold in stores and you cannot get a browser without downloading it. So how are you going to download it if you don't have one to begin with?

To be honest, this is a ridiculous hold over from the Netscape battle, and it's time it ended. I have no problem with ANY bundled software in my OS. Just give me an easy way to remove it so I can if I don't want it. Windows 7 already isn't going to include Mail, Photo Galery, Movie Maker, etc. by default.

If the EU is going to do this, then they need to crack down on Apple as well. The Mac OS has not only a browser, but iLife, including iTunes, Quicktime, iMovie, iPhoto, iWeb preinstalled. How is that any different than including IE? It's unbalanced.

Seriously, governments need to move into the modern era where most people realize that there are options out there and couldn't really care less if their OS has bundled software.
Reply to this comment
by Penguinisto January 16, 2009 3:28 PM PST
"Why aren't they going after Apple or Linux vendors? "

* Linux distros give you a wide variety of choice as to which browser you want - you can pick it (or as many as you like) during install (Opera, Firefox, Konqueror, Netscape Navigator, Flock, Dillo, links, and a few more I can't recall off the top of my head...)

* Apple sells computers (as in, the whole package), not operating systems. Expand your sales to the entire box (hardware+software), and the rules are different due to the fact that you're selling an all-in-one solution, not just a piece of it (which is what MSFT does by selling only Windows). This is a poorly-translated jist of the laws mind, but it should suffice.

* Oh, and neither Apple nor RedHat (or any other Linux distro) have ever gone around and threatened OEMs with price hikes (or conversely, withdrawal of "marketing" funds) if the OEM refuses to reject the idea of installing competing web browsers.
by tm_anon January 16, 2009 5:02 PM PST
Also, when's the last time you tried to remove IE completely from a Windows installation? I know with XP it was next to impossible to do anything but remove the icon from the desktop. The most I could ever get is an IE that would still run but with addons removed. With Linux, I can remove the browser completely if I feel like it. With Apple, as was stated by Penguinisto, they're marketed as an all-in-one solution. Show me a machine built by MS with MS technologies and I'll show you a company that can dictate what browsers are preinstalled on its own software. If Windows was not forced on computers who simply wish to buy a computer, the browser issue would most likely be dropped. Customers would be choosing a complete software installation and not just living with it. Yet another reason the EU doesn't dictate to Linux distros what can and cannot be bundled with their software is the very nature of a Linux distro. Nobody is dictating what can and cannot be installed. The very nature of Linux is choice. Don't like the Windows management software? Change it to something you like. Don't like the browser? Change it. Don't like anything about your OS? Change it.
by eferron January 17, 2009 9:28 PM PST
Penguinisto,

Have you or anyone actually removed Safari from OSX? No really have you done it?
by Lerianis January 17, 2009 10:07 PM PST
eferron, right in one. I will say for the record, confirmed by a person I know who uses Mac computers..... SAFARI CANNOT BE REMOVED TOTALLY!
It is still on that hard drive somewhere even after you remove it, and will automatically be re-installed if the OS realizes "Hey, this person doesn't have a web browser!"
by m_gol January 17, 2009 10:42 PM PST
@ Penguinisto
"* Linux distros give you a wide variety of choice as to which browser you want"
Really? Try Ubuntu. Firefox is installed by default and there is no way to install Opera without Medibuntu repositories. There is no way to install another browser instead during the installation process.

Is there anything wrong about it? No, anybody can install any browser using repositories (and no browser is needed for that process ;)).

"* Apple (...) and the rules are different due to the fact that you're selling an all-in-one solution, not just a piece of it"
Apple doesn't sell all-in-one solution, it does not offer me a flat where I can put my computer, they do not offer me the place where I can get electric current. This is just part of the solution!
Don't be funny, in this way You can explain everything.
by Vegaman_Dan January 19, 2009 1:48 PM PST
Penguinsto wrote:

"* Apple sells computers (as in, the whole package), not operating systems. Expand your sales to the entire box (hardware+software), and the rules are different due to the fact that you're selling an all-in-one solution, not just a piece of it (which is what MSFT does by selling only Windows). This is a poorly-translated jist of the laws mind, but it should suffice. "

Your agrument would be valid if Apple also included a copy of Windows, Linux, BSD, Irix, and every other OS on the planet in the box with that Apple product to give you a choice of which OS you wanted on that hardware. However they don't, they *BUNDLE* the OS X OS with the hardware. The EU's complaint about bundling applies here as well.

You're right, however.... your comments are a poorly translated gist and demonstrates you don't actually have a complete handle on the situation. It's a good attempt, but flawed.
by Seaspray0 April 23, 2009 12:22 PM PDT
@penquinisto. Actually apple does sell operating systems. They sold them to pystar. Or you can make the argument that they sell operating systems and bundle the hardware with it. The "apple is a hardware company" can be challenged.
by contentcreator--2008 January 16, 2009 1:16 PM PST
The EU's approach does not make sense. By the same logic you could force the unbundling of every user-level application in Windows--- Notepad, Paint, Media player, calculator, sound recorder, all the games, ... That certainly would not benefit any consumers I know. Meanwhile, Microsoft's main competitor is adding as many bundled applications into their operating system as possible.
Reply to this comment
by DrtyDogg January 16, 2009 1:42 PM PST
they already did media player, see the wildly unsuccessful Windows XPN.
by Seaspray0 April 23, 2009 12:24 PM PDT
If they try to make them unbundle notepad, I'll fight to the bitter end!
by eBob1 January 16, 2009 1:18 PM PST
Stripping out IE entirely from Windows is not that simple. The browser is so embedded as part of the OS that taking it out would also wipe out vital parts of it. Also, if there is no browser included with the OS, how is one to download a different browser? I could by using FTP, but most non-technical computer users are not going to know how to do that.
Reply to this comment
by DrtyDogg January 16, 2009 1:50 PM PST
Don't forget to mention the massive amount of 3rd party program incompatibilities.
by iertry January 16, 2009 1:19 PM PST
If they don't bundle the browser how are users supposed to get on the web to download a browser? OEM's would therefore have to bundle browsers with European PC's. I think anyway.
Reply to this comment
by karpenterskids January 16, 2009 1:54 PM PST
EXACTLY...I visited this article just to say the exact same thing: How are you going to go download something if you don't have a browser in the first place?!

And a lot of people who buy computers (read: grandmothers/grandfathers) wouldn't know where to download another browser if their life depended on it. It's just so much easier to have a small "Internet Explorer" icon on the desktop when you purchase your system.
by Vegaman_Dan January 19, 2009 1:49 PM PST
Isn't it obvious? You simply use the AOL CD. :)
by larsenje January 16, 2009 1:27 PM PST
Every OS comes with a browser by default... A computer is a tool and should be treated as such. This rule makes as much sense as forcing Dewalt to not put a 10" blade inside their 10" table saw because it infringes upon saw blade manufacturers ability to compete with Dewalt.

It is a stupid thing to do and the EU is stupid for doing it.
Reply to this comment
by noota January 17, 2009 2:15 PM PST
There's only one company having a monopoly for far too long at the home user desktops.
Monopolies should not be possible for too long, it endangers real innovation, and choice for the end user.
Glad to see this is happening.
I'm looking forward to see more choice than just MS Windows pre installed on personal computers.
by Lerianis January 17, 2009 10:09 PM PST
noota, the reason there is 'no choice' is because Linux (the only REAL competitor to Windows on PC's) is too technical for the normal user.
It's time for people like you, who apparently have their heads up their butts, to realize that and simply live with it. Microsoft has won the OS wars, period and done with. It's time to stop punishing them for building the better mousetrap, and realize that you are being totally unfair towards Microsoft.
by Perry_Clease January 16, 2009 1:32 PM PST
is the EU having a problem bundling the browser WITH or bundling it IN the operating system? From what I read it is the later.
Reply to this comment
by sbrixie January 16, 2009 1:43 PM PST
Leave it to the EU to waste time and money on a non-issue. If I lived there, I'd be angry.
Reply to this comment
by Hunnter2k3 January 16, 2009 2:03 PM PST
If anything, they should just kill off that god awful excuse for a web browser.
But WOOPs, it IS Microsoft, as if that will ever happen... they love having their own version of everything that anyone else has ever made in existence, or buy them out.

Microsoft have abused their position and lead to such a terrible web with incompatibilities.
The standards aren't that hard Microsoft, _I_ know them and i don't intend to build a web browser in the near future. (had thought about it though)

They have stagnated the "web", regardless of peoples opinions, and that is why they are targeting them, not just because "oh lol, its M$, let us steal some more monies from them".
People are STILL using ActiveX for crying out loud. (yet another attempt to copy)
Now they are doing the same again, but renamed it Silverlight and threw in a scripting to try beat out Flash. (both are pretty crap to be honest)
Reply to this comment
by onlyauser January 16, 2009 3:53 PM PST
Good job to the EU
Reply to this comment
by JJDickson January 17, 2009 1:07 AM PST
EUSSR more like. JD.
by gsmiller88 January 16, 2009 6:55 PM PST
And what of Apple bundling Safari with Mac OS X in the EU!?

I see no problem with Microsoft bundling their own browser with their operating system, but the end user should be able to uninstall it if desired.
Reply to this comment
by Lerianis January 17, 2009 10:10 PM PST
They cannot uninstall it because it uses a lot of the same stuff as Windows Explorer. To have a method of uninstalling it, would be tempting Fate and tempting Windows Explorer to not work as well.
by Xyraxel January 16, 2009 8:26 PM PST
So lets say i buy a copy of windows without an browser, how am I supposed to download a browser ??? does that mean I should buy a copy of a browser aswell ?? to be honest I think thats bull **** , I dont use IE i use firefox but come on this really doesnt make much sense to me, even Ubuntu and Mac's come pre loaded with Web browsers.
Reply to this comment
by tigrad04 January 17, 2009 9:35 PM PST
Agree 100%. If the EU goes after Microsoft they should also go after Apple for bundleing safari in OSX and force all the distributions of linux from including Firefox. I would love for someone to explain to me why opera is going to great legnths to expand their market share. It is not like we are paying for their browser anyways and microsoft is blocking revenue for them. Or is that their goal. forcing us to buy a browser like in the Netscape days. Doubtfull that would happen even if opera does win, because firefox is still around, AND open source!!!
by Vegaman_Dan January 19, 2009 1:51 PM PST
If the EU gets their way, then Apple will be forced to sell OS X separate of the hardware since right now it comes bundled- you can't buy the hardware without the OS included and the OS isn't sold separately (only upgrades). But that does open up more revenue oppotunities for Apple as they could charge even more for the complete package really.
Showing 1 of 2 pages (62 Comments)
advertisement

FAQ: Buying the right Windows 7 upgrade

Readers still have lots of questions on just which version of the software they need to buy in order to upgrade their PC. CNET News tries to offer some answers.

N.Y. lawsuit details Intel's 'largesse' toward Dell

Attorney General Andrew Cuomo's federal antitrust case filed Wednesday alleges a longstanding symbiotic relationship between Intel and Dell.

About Microsoft

Stay up-to-date on news centered in Redmond, Wash., from acquisitions to product updates to leadership developments.

Add this feed to your online news reader

Microsoft topics

advertisement
advertisement

Inside CNET News

Scroll Left Scroll Right