EU may raise cap for Microsoft daily fines

Europe will raise future fines on Microsoft to $3.82 million a day if it keeps defying antitrust ruling, source says.

The story "EU may raise cap for Microsoft daily fines" published July 10, 2006 at 7:20 AM is no longer available on CNET News.

Content from Reuters expires after 30 days.

[kunderwood]

Fine

I feel the article is nice but does not disclose enough detail to the story. This is my first time hearing about this, and as huge as the fine is it surprises me that it hasn't been singing in every paper from coast to coast. I feel this should be something that needs to be heard as well as viewed by the public to let us viewers know exactly what is going on in the business world

It's been in the news many times before

I really don't give a damn about Microsoft, but I believe that the whole thing started with MS's lack of documentation about the Operating System and other technologies to developers. Microsoft initially agreed to write up documentation but has been slow moving in doing so. This story's over a year old, this is just a small update.

[kunderwood]

Fine

I feel the article is nice but does not disclose enough detail to the story. This is my first time hearing about this, and as huge as the fine is it surprises me that it hasn't been singing in every paper from coast to coast. I feel this should be something that needs to be heard as well as viewed by the public to let us viewers know exactly what is going on in the business world

It's been in the news many times before

I really don't give a damn about Microsoft, but I believe that the whole thing started with MS's lack of documentation about the Operating System and other technologies to developers. Microsoft initially agreed to write up documentation but has been slow moving in doing so. This story's over a year old, this is just a small update.

[extinctone]

Re: Fine

This is a long-running story that's been followed by the tech sites rather well. I think it may have made it to the mainstream media as a small blurb here and there, but now that you mention it I also find it odd it wasn't covered more. My take, in short, the EU is taking care of business the US gov. was too spineless to do years ago. It still doesn't go far enough, IMO, but it's about time something was done about Microsoft's crimial behavior.

[extinctone]

Re: Fine

This is a long-running story that's been followed by the tech sites rather well. I think it may have made it to the mainstream media as a small blurb here and there, but now that you mention it I also find it odd it wasn't covered more. My take, in short, the EU is taking care of business the US gov. was too spineless to do years ago. It still doesn't go far enough, IMO, but it's about time something was done about Microsoft's crimial behavior.

[Björn Lundahl]

The EU is Playing God!

People by buying products and services in a free market are doing this very thing, voluntarily. Microsoft is a large company, just because of the fact, that people voluntarily buy their software?s. In practise, people have ?voted? for Microsoft?s services and are still voting for them. If consumers thought, for instance in the past, like EU bureaucrats, that Microsoft, ?is getting to large?, they would have had shopped elsewhere, even if it was more expensive or that alternative software?s did not entirely fulfil their needs. Why, because it would be a value, in this very example, for the consumers to do so. But the consumers did not shop elsewhere and are still not shopping elsewhere (even when it is free), which means that they were and are, happy with Microsoft and this story is only about politics. If we want to question people?s choices and ?votes?, we should also question people?s votes when there are political elections. Why not, then, ?split? political parties which are in power?? We could then argue that ?people didn?t really vote for them, it was brilliant advertising and so on, that made the choice for them?. If Microsoft wants to have IE built into its operating system, they have a right to do so. It is their product. I, myself, like Firefox (and I think, IE 7 might be secure and good too), but I do believe that Microsoft is doing its customers a great service. This because, most customers do not download an alternative browser, which means that they are happy with IE. Even if it is true that earlier IE browsers have not been so secure and good. We must consider the fact that the more attractive operating system Microsoft delivers, the better price they get and the more of them will they sell. Microsoft, for example, does a lot of things to make its new operating system attractive (the Vista version). The market price mechanism functions in this way. Bureaucrats do not have this mechanism and can not know what people really want! Microsoft also, naturally, has the right to offer any file system they want and if we consider mentioned price mechanism and one of the very reasons of Microsoft?s success, which was standardization, we can get a clue that Microsoft is doing the right thing or at least is trying to do the right thing (we are all humans and can therefore make mistakes). Björn Lundahl, Göteborg, Sweden

[qwerty75]

geez

What have you been smoking?

MS never has and never will exist for the customer. They are a monopolist, pure and simple.

You claim that the EU is playing God when they enforce laws. How you get to that point is beyond me, but leave it to MS fans to be retarded.

If MS wants to do business in an area they have to comply with local laws, period.

[Björn Lundahl]

The EU is Playing God!

People by buying products and services in a free market are doing this very thing, voluntarily. Microsoft is a large company, just because of the fact, that people voluntarily buy their software?s. In practise, people have ?voted? for Microsoft?s services and are still voting for them. If consumers thought, for instance in the past, like EU bureaucrats, that Microsoft, ?is getting to large?, they would have had shopped elsewhere, even if it was more expensive or that alternative software?s did not entirely fulfil their needs. Why, because it would be a value, in this very example, for the consumers to do so. But the consumers did not shop elsewhere and are still not shopping elsewhere (even when it is free), which means that they were and are, happy with Microsoft and this story is only about politics. If we want to question people?s choices and ?votes?, we should also question people?s votes when there are political elections. Why not, then, ?split? political parties which are in power?? We could then argue that ?people didn?t really vote for them, it was brilliant advertising and so on, that made the choice for them?. If Microsoft wants to have IE built into its operating system, they have a right to do so. It is their product. I, myself, like Firefox (and I think, IE 7 might be secure and good too), but I do believe that Microsoft is doing its customers a great service. This because, most customers do not download an alternative browser, which means that they are happy with IE. Even if it is true that earlier IE browsers have not been so secure and good. We must consider the fact that the more attractive operating system Microsoft delivers, the better price they get and the more of them will they sell. Microsoft, for example, does a lot of things to make its new operating system attractive (the Vista version). The market price mechanism functions in this way. Bureaucrats do not have this mechanism and can not know what people really want! Microsoft also, naturally, has the right to offer any file system they want and if we consider mentioned price mechanism and one of the very reasons of Microsoft?s success, which was standardization, we can get a clue that Microsoft is doing the right thing or at least is trying to do the right thing (we are all humans and can therefore make mistakes). Björn Lundahl, Göteborg, Sweden

[qwerty75]

geez

What have you been smoking?

MS never has and never will exist for the customer. They are a monopolist, pure and simple.

You claim that the EU is playing God when they enforce laws. How you get to that point is beyond me, but leave it to MS fans to be retarded.

If MS wants to do business in an area they have to comply with local laws, period.

[Björn Lundahl]

History Repeats Itself! Yesterday it was IBM, Today it is Microsoft.

Well, it was the Market and not the government
that made IBM smaller relatively to other companies in the same business. Who talks about the IBM, so called monopoly (x), these days? No one, because the Market destroyed it. Not that I thought that IBM should be punished for serving the society and its customers, but the point is, suddenly, customers goes elsewhere. Usually, new alternatives emerge. If no alternatives emerge? Well, then no better alternatives exist and everyone should be happy! Now, politicians are instead focused on Microsoft. They have, as usual, made a new "problem" to deal with and something to talk about! They have, naturally, done their PR job well and declared themselves indispensable, and a new opportunity to receive votes have for them therefore luckily emerged.
Björn Lundahl, Göteborg, Sweden

[Björn Lundahl]

History Repeats Itself! Yesterday it was IBM, Today it is Microsoft.

Well, it was the Market and not the government
that made IBM smaller relatively to other companies in the same business. Who talks about the IBM, so called monopoly (x), these days? No one, because the Market destroyed it. Not that I thought that IBM should be punished for serving the society and its customers, but the point is, suddenly, customers goes elsewhere. Usually, new alternatives emerge. If no alternatives emerge? Well, then no better alternatives exist and everyone should be happy! Now, politicians are instead focused on Microsoft. They have, as usual, made a new "problem" to deal with and something to talk about! They have, naturally, done their PR job well and declared themselves indispensable, and a new opportunity to receive votes have for them therefore luckily emerged.
Björn Lundahl, Göteborg, Sweden

[Jackson Cracker]

still wimpy

When are these Eurowimps going to realize that fines and civil
settlements didn't work against Microsoft in the USA either.
They need to wait for the next time Gates is flying in for one
of those billionaire get-togethers in Switzerland, and take him
into custody when he makes a stopover in one of the EU countries.

[Jackson Cracker]

still wimpy

When are these Eurowimps going to realize that fines and civil
settlements didn't work against Microsoft in the USA either.
They need to wait for the next time Gates is flying in for one
of those billionaire get-togethers in Switzerland, and take him
into custody when he makes a stopover in one of the EU countries.

[rnln02]

EU Fines

The fining of Microsoft in these circumstances is nothing short of extortion. The EU is acting as an agent of Microsoft's competitors, who choose not to make the investments necessary to compete. The commission has already doubly penalized Microsoft by virtue of both the "fines" assessed and the staggering costs in time and resources to document their server protocols. The announcement of even larger fines (per day) only emphasizes the the commissions prejudice (or their collusion). I sincerely hope the Court of First Instance nails the commission to the wall, and / or that the United States government steps in and levies some serious fines of it's own against the EU for their blatant anticompetitive behavior against a US corporation. Let them fill their pockets (and those of the Microsoft competitors) elsewhere.

[qwerty75]

Ironic

Anti-competitve behavior?

Like what MS has done since day 1?

The US has no jurisdiction, and the EU has a responsibility to enforce its laws, something the US has been neglegent in, with regard to microsoft.

[rnln02]

EU Fines

The fining of Microsoft in these circumstances is nothing short of extortion. The EU is acting as an agent of Microsoft's competitors, who choose not to make the investments necessary to compete. The commission has already doubly penalized Microsoft by virtue of both the "fines" assessed and the staggering costs in time and resources to document their server protocols. The announcement of even larger fines (per day) only emphasizes the the commissions prejudice (or their collusion). I sincerely hope the Court of First Instance nails the commission to the wall, and / or that the United States government steps in and levies some serious fines of it's own against the EU for their blatant anticompetitive behavior against a US corporation. Let them fill their pockets (and those of the Microsoft competitors) elsewhere.

[qwerty75]

Ironic

Anti-competitve behavior?

Like what MS has done since day 1?

The US has no jurisdiction, and the EU has a responsibility to enforce its laws, something the US has been neglegent in, with regard to microsoft.

[rnln02]

Anti-competitive

Microsoft started out like every other commercial enterprise, no more advantage than any one else. Right place at the right time, and vision enough to see it. There are many who have been equally intuative, equally successful in their own niches, and they too have had to suffer the parasitic behavior of those who won't / can't do what it takes to compete, to be successful. Microsoft has the misfortune of being today's standard bearer in this regard. A "victim mentality" permeates our society today, and it is the spineless wanabes that are constantly crying foul, filling up the courts with endless litigation. The EU in this case is an enabler, allowing the sniveling leaches to gorge themselves on the fruits of others labor. Sad commentary for Euopean law if this is it's objective. Vestiges of socialism? Yes, technically the US may have no jurisdiction, but we are not without means to influence the outcome.

[Gayle Edwards]

My... what an amazing FANTASY youve created for yourself...

I believe the actual technical term is a "psychotic delusion"... But, you might want to investigate the truth... because, the REALITY is that...

Microsoft HAS been REPEATEDLY found GUILTY of VIOLATING the LAW, ...in the United States, ...in Europe, ...and I believe, now, in Asia, too.

Microsoft DOES HAVE the WORST SOFTWARE-SECURITY-RECORD, and reputation, in the ENTIRE computer industry. In fact, the leading suggestion from almost every security-expert from both, the United States, and around the world is... if you want to be "safe", ...DONT USE MICROSOFT PRODUCTS, PERIOD.

American college professors have actually used Microsoft-methodologies as a, textbook, example of how NOT to engineer ANY successful-project.

But, despite all of that, according to the "Wall Street Journal", Microsoft DOES actually manage to EXTRACT higher profit-margins than the "ILLEGAL DRUG-TRADE".

...not bad for a company that COPIED, "borrowed", or STOLE OUTRIGHT, virtually every product that they ever produced. Frankly, Microsoft ONLY became the "successful" MONOPOLY that they currently are through numerous, WELL-DOCUMENTED, unfair, unethical, and even SERIOUSLY-ILLEGAL tactics. And, yes, those ARE the OFFICIAL findings of virtually EVERY COURT, and technology-historian, that has ever seriously investigated the matter.

You want to talk about a "victim" mentality..? Poor Microsoft, the RICHEST SOFTWARE COMPANY ON EARTH, ...thanks to their intentional DIRTY-DEALINGS, has been CAUGHT, AGAIN, and AGAIN, BREAKING THE LAW. And, when CONVICTED, inevitably goes screaming that everybody is just picking on them, because theyre "successful", RICH, and American. What a load of HOGWASH.

But, it gets WORSE...

Now, Microsoft is in the middle of, FINALLY, UTTERLY DESTROYING consumer rights, and being able to UNETHICALLY-CONTROL (and forcibly extract even more revenue from) CONSUMERS, AND THE ENTIRE COMPUTER INDUSTRY, with a newly-created IRON-FIST of so-called "security", and "anti-piracy features" (as well as numerous anti-competitive "applications") IRREMOVABLY EMBEDDED DIRECTLY in their latest "unholy creation"... "Vista". Read the "white-papers", and Microsofts OFFICIAL "roadmaps"... its all in there. Eventually, CONSUMERS WILL BE IDENTIFIED before they are ALLOWED to USE THEIR OWN COMPUTER. Consumers WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to load software that is not APPROVED, and LICENSED BY MICROSOFT. And, if you are not running ALL of Microsofts "updates" and "DRM components" you WILL NOT BE ALLOWED on the Internet, AT ALL. Not to mention, Microsofts eventual PERPETUAL-PAYMENT for USE, and INDIVIDUAL-USER LICENSING SCHEMES.

And, all of this just to compensate for Microsofts OWN COMPLETE-INCOMPETENCE in creating SECURE, and STABLE, software with the features that consumers actually want, when they want it.

Finally, in my opinion, simply pointing-out these FACTS, does NOT mean you are whining "...sniveling leaches". It means you are not a SHEEP, being lead to slaughter, by the CORRUPT and theyre ARROGANTLY-STUPID followers.

[rnln02]

Anti-competitive

Microsoft started out like every other commercial enterprise, no more advantage than any one else. Right place at the right time, and vision enough to see it. There are many who have been equally intuative, equally successful in their own niches, and they too have had to suffer the parasitic behavior of those who won't / can't do what it takes to compete, to be successful. Microsoft has the misfortune of being today's standard bearer in this regard. A "victim mentality" permeates our society today, and it is the spineless wanabes that are constantly crying foul, filling up the courts with endless litigation. The EU in this case is an enabler, allowing the sniveling leaches to gorge themselves on the fruits of others labor. Sad commentary for Euopean law if this is it's objective. Vestiges of socialism? Yes, technically the US may have no jurisdiction, but we are not without means to influence the outcome.

[Gayle Edwards]

My... what an amazing FANTASY youve created for yourself...

I believe the actual technical term is a "psychotic delusion"... But, you might want to investigate the truth... because, the REALITY is that...

Microsoft HAS been REPEATEDLY found GUILTY of VIOLATING the LAW, ...in the United States, ...in Europe, ...and I believe, now, in Asia, too.

Microsoft DOES HAVE the WORST SOFTWARE-SECURITY-RECORD, and reputation, in the ENTIRE computer industry. In fact, the leading suggestion from almost every security-expert from both, the United States, and around the world is... if you want to be "safe", ...DONT USE MICROSOFT PRODUCTS, PERIOD.

American college professors have actually used Microsoft-methodologies as a, textbook, example of how NOT to engineer ANY successful-project.

But, despite all of that, according to the "Wall Street Journal", Microsoft DOES actually manage to EXTRACT higher profit-margins than the "ILLEGAL DRUG-TRADE".

...not bad for a company that COPIED, "borrowed", or STOLE OUTRIGHT, virtually every product that they ever produced. Frankly, Microsoft ONLY became the "successful" MONOPOLY that they currently are through numerous, WELL-DOCUMENTED, unfair, unethical, and even SERIOUSLY-ILLEGAL tactics. And, yes, those ARE the OFFICIAL findings of virtually EVERY COURT, and technology-historian, that has ever seriously investigated the matter.

You want to talk about a "victim" mentality..? Poor Microsoft, the RICHEST SOFTWARE COMPANY ON EARTH, ...thanks to their intentional DIRTY-DEALINGS, has been CAUGHT, AGAIN, and AGAIN, BREAKING THE LAW. And, when CONVICTED, inevitably goes screaming that everybody is just picking on them, because theyre "successful", RICH, and American. What a load of HOGWASH.

But, it gets WORSE...

Now, Microsoft is in the middle of, FINALLY, UTTERLY DESTROYING consumer rights, and being able to UNETHICALLY-CONTROL (and forcibly extract even more revenue from) CONSUMERS, AND THE ENTIRE COMPUTER INDUSTRY, with a newly-created IRON-FIST of so-called "security", and "anti-piracy features" (as well as numerous anti-competitive "applications") IRREMOVABLY EMBEDDED DIRECTLY in their latest "unholy creation"... "Vista". Read the "white-papers", and Microsofts OFFICIAL "roadmaps"... its all in there. Eventually, CONSUMERS WILL BE IDENTIFIED before they are ALLOWED to USE THEIR OWN COMPUTER. Consumers WILL NOT BE ALLOWED to load software that is not APPROVED, and LICENSED BY MICROSOFT. And, if you are not running ALL of Microsofts "updates" and "DRM components" you WILL NOT BE ALLOWED on the Internet, AT ALL. Not to mention, Microsofts eventual PERPETUAL-PAYMENT for USE, and INDIVIDUAL-USER LICENSING SCHEMES.

And, all of this just to compensate for Microsofts OWN COMPLETE-INCOMPETENCE in creating SECURE, and STABLE, software with the features that consumers actually want, when they want it.

Finally, in my opinion, simply pointing-out these FACTS, does NOT mean you are whining "...sniveling leaches". It means you are not a SHEEP, being lead to slaughter, by the CORRUPT and theyre ARROGANTLY-STUPID followers.

[Captain_Spock]

Any Unjustified Fines Against The Microsoft Corporation By The EU...

... should be met with an equal response in the form a world-wide "Apartheid-Like-Boycott" of European made goods and services by the 90% plus market share that support Microsoft's products in addition others to send a message to the EU for their communist-like actions against the US based Corporation.

[Gayle Edwards]

BOYCOTT..? Im planning on patting them on the back...

...for doing what the United States legal-system REFUSED to do, ...when Microsoft was CONVICTED here.

"...90% plus market share that support Microsoft's products..."..?

"... communist-like..."..?

...oh, I get it, YOURE JOKING...

...GOOD ONE...

[Captain_Spock]

Any Unjustified Fines Against The Microsoft Corporation By The EU...

... should be met with an equal response in the form a world-wide "Apartheid-Like-Boycott" of European made goods and services by the 90% plus market share that support Microsoft's products in addition others to send a message to the EU for their communist-like actions against the US based Corporation.

[Gayle Edwards]

BOYCOTT..? Im planning on patting them on the back...

...for doing what the United States legal-system REFUSED to do, ...when Microsoft was CONVICTED here.

"...90% plus market share that support Microsoft's products..."..?

"... communist-like..."..?

...oh, I get it, YOURE JOKING...

...GOOD ONE...

[Björn Lundahl]

History Repeats Itself! Yesterday it was IBM, Today it is Microsoft.

Well, it was the Market and not the government
that made IBM smaller relatively to other companies in the same business. Who talks about the IBM, so called monopoly (x), these days? No one, because the Market destroyed it. Not that I thought that IBM should be punished for serving the society and its customers, but the point is, suddenly, customers goes elsewhere. Usually, new alternatives emerge. If no alternatives emerge? Well, then no better alternatives exist and everyone should be happy! History repeats itself! Now, politicians are instead focused on Microsoft. They have, as usual, made a new ?problem? to deal with and something to talk about! They have, naturally, done their PR job well and declared themselves indispensable, and a new opportunity to receive votes have for them therefore luckily emerged.
Björn Lundahl, Göteborg, Sweden
(x) = It was not a real monopoly
with a government privilege
in outlawing any competition.
No government restrictions
or barriers to compete with
IBM existed (same goes with
Microsoft today).

[Björn Lundahl]

History Repeats Itself! Yesterday it was IBM, Today it is Microsoft.

Well, it was the Market and not the government
that made IBM smaller relatively to other companies in the same business. Who talks about the IBM, so called monopoly (x), these days? No one, because the Market destroyed it. Not that I thought that IBM should be punished for serving the society and its customers, but the point is, suddenly, customers goes elsewhere. Usually, new alternatives emerge. If no alternatives emerge? Well, then no better alternatives exist and everyone should be happy! History repeats itself! Now, politicians are instead focused on Microsoft. They have, as usual, made a new ?problem? to deal with and something to talk about! They have, naturally, done their PR job well and declared themselves indispensable, and a new opportunity to receive votes have for them therefore luckily emerged.
Björn Lundahl, Göteborg, Sweden
(x) = It was not a real monopoly
with a government privilege
in outlawing any competition.
No government restrictions
or barriers to compete with
IBM existed (same goes with
Microsoft today).