Read more on Cloud Computing
December 22, 2005 4:21 AM PST
Europe threatens Microsoft with daily fines
- Related Stories
-
Still 'no demand' for media-player-free Windows
November 18, 2005 -
Ballmer to meet with EU antitrust chief
September 29, 2005 -
Massachusetts moves ahead sans Microsoft
September 23, 2005 -
Microsoft details EU concessions
June 6, 2005 -
EU upholds penalties against Microsoft
December 22, 2004 -
Europe plays hardball with Microsoft
March 24, 2004 -
EU slaps record fine on Microsoft
March 24, 2004
The European Union's executive arm noted that the clock started ticking Dec. 15 and will continue until it makes its final decision in the landmark case against the software giant.
Microsoft was ordered by the Commission in March 2004 to disclose complete and accurate interface documentation to work group server competitors, in order for them to have full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers. That order was part of the Commission's findings that the software giant allegedly abused its market dominance to increase its presence in the work group, server operating system and media player industries.
The Commission, which held discussions with Microsoft about its compliance with its order and hired a trustee to monitor the company's compliance, set a Dec. 15 deadline for meeting the stipulations of its order. That order required Microsoft to supply complete and accurate interoperability information, making its software available on reasonable terms.
"I have given Microsoft every opportunity to comply with its obligations. However, I have been left with no alternative other than to proceed via the formal route to ensure Microsoft's compliance," Neelie Kroes, European competition commissioner, said in a statement.
Microsoft has five weeks to respond to the Commission's statement of objections. The Commission, which will consult with the advisory committees of member state competition authorities, would then issue a decision on whether to impose its fine of up to $2.37 million a day on Microsoft. The fine will be retroactively applied to Dec. 15 and the date that the Commission reaches a final decision on whether Microsoft has complied with its order.
Microsoft said it plans to contest the Commission's statement of objections and request an oral hearing on the issue.
"We believe today's statement of objections is unjustified. The Commission has issued this statement regarding technical documentation we submitted last week, even though, by its own admission, neither it nor the trustee have even
62 comments
Join the conversation! Add your comment (Log in or register)
They have money to play such games. After all, compliance with court order in long term might cost more.
www.nopieinthesky.net
I would refer the EU Judge *cough* "Gavel Jockey" to <a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/legal/eudecision/" target="_newWindow">http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/legal/eudecision/</a>
Great, if is documented then Microsoft has no reason to be delaying releasing it...it's public knowledge, right? They should have no problem in releasing it officially next week...
Are you on crack? Read the Samba developement list, Microsoft is always changing things and only notifing "partners" about the changes. It can take Samba weeks/months to figure out what changed with the latest service/security update.
It's been one year, and Microsoft is "still working" on releasing documentation as per U.S Anti-trust ruling...they are delaying the information since they only want businesses to implement software which is Microsoft approved. If they delay a few more years, more business will be locked into Microsoft based solutions. Once business are locked in, it's very costly to change...that's their main arguement why Windows has lower TCO than Linux...too costly to migrate Office files and interface with Windows based infrasture....
Besides most other software makers that have programs that other communicate with already have published details.
Try to keep up
I assume then following the EU logic that Apple should be required to produce a 'Media Playerless' version of the Ipod as they are clearly budling it with software that displays photos and a hard disk, to the detriment of competitiors!
O sorry they are based in Europe so they are exempt from the Anti Monopoly Rules.
Microsoft was declared a monopoly by the U.S. D.O.J., and (AFAIK) SAP was not.
Microsoft is not being asked to publish source code. They're being asked to publish the interface specs between product A and product B, so that product B competitors can compete in that market. Without that information, there is no product B competition. Using a product A market monopoly to eliminate competion in a product B market is a violation of antitrust law.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.microsoft.com/worldwide/" target="_newWindow">http://www.microsoft.com/worldwide/</a>
If you want to play in their sandbox, you need to follow their rules.
than forcing them to publish their proprietary
extensions. In the end, their extensions are
inferior and lock the consumer in. The ODF, XHTML,
CSS and HTML are good examplesn of industry
standards that MS has a hard or impossible time
following, which if they followed, would make a huge
difference. Force the monopoly to play by the rules
rather than forcing them to publish their rules
which they can change the moment they publish them.
Since they can't seem to get money from their own highly overtaxed citizens, they want to steal money from a successful American company.
If you want to compete against MS, come up with something better. If Europeans are too stupid to download their mediaplayer of choice, they shouldn't be allowed to use computers! Making MS release a version that has one is utterly stupid.
MS that their business practices were monopolistic and illegal.
The US courts never could figure that out. Some say MS bribery.
ie., financial lobbying, was involved, others say the judges
weren't smart enough in evaluating business practices. Still
others say that MS bought up enough of the plaintiffs to weaken
the case. Whatever. The American people had no problem seeing
what and how MS was doing. Only the EU courts had the courage
to stand up and smack MS where it hurts, the pocketbook.
Maybe the EU is a general failure. They are an outstanding
success in the case.
<a class="jive-link-external" href="http://www.microsoft.com/worldwide/" target="_newWindow">http://www.microsoft.com/worldwide/</a>
I assume Microsoft is free to pull out of Europe at any time.
--and before you Linux peeps start up... yes they could all install linux and turn those paper weights 'back on' WITHOUT MS software
lol
Exactly! Tell 'em where to go!
Of course M$ can't cancel licenses for users that have paid for thier software, but they could close the European M$ offices. Then, there would be no way for the EU to enforce the fines. (I don't think M$ would pay if North Korea or Cuba fined them a few million a day!)
People would still "smuggle-in" copies. :)
I'm not a big M$ fan, but I'm even less a fan of big government!
It would give such a boost to us! First we will have a lot of work moving everything away from MS, and after that we aould all become much more efficient in our jobs. Just think about it, no more whining users complaining about outlook fuss, or bluescreens... (NOT being sarcastic here)
Must be the time of year, I am musing of a better world...
a bigtime MacAddict. Secondly is the EU asking for disclosure
from other software companies? Don't give some BS about how
M$ is squeezing out other businesses because back in 1995
people were saying, "oh Apple is going to go Bankrupt". Guess
what? They didn't! I agree with the previous poster. I am not a
fan of a Foreign Agency trying to tell a U.S. Company what to do.
As far as I am concerned the EU can mind it's own business in
Europe and leave U.S. Business to the U.S. Government.
For you bleeding hearts out there: "If the EU gets away with this
and M$ complies and pays for it, what's to stop them from going
after other U.S. companies?"
of all the MEDIA players Mediaplayer is the most liked cause #1 they do allow other people to make codecs for mediaplayer. Mplayer is another example of a media player that does this. i can go to a website and download a codec for media player if realplayer or apple lets other people do this they would do much better. you can download any codec from websites and not have to wait for Real or apple to realise the codec
i use OOB for anime movies there is none for real player
with apple and realplayer you can only get the codecs from their server and you have to pay for their software (apple has a free but its not full)
Please read the EU pdf that you can find using a searh like Google and the text:
Case COMP/C-3/37.792
for the pdf.
It is a well written text about MS and its abuse of its monopoly state.
It schould have been written in the USA but the US DoJ simply screwed it up.