October 11, 2005 5:19 PM PDT

Microsoft not out of legal woods yet

Microsoft's settlement with RealNetworks on Tuesday eliminates one lingering headache for the embattled software maker, but other legal migraines remain.

Most prominent is the European Union's ongoing pursuit of Microsoft through the courts. In March 2004, then-European Competition Commissioner Mario Monti levied a 497 million euro ($596 million) fine after ruling that the company had unfairly wielded its market power against rivals.

RealNetworks was the largest corporation participating in the European Union's antitrust prosecution and must withdraw from those proceedings under the terms of the settlement. But RealNetworks' absence likely won't make a difference during Microsoft's appeal.

"The settlement strengthens the Commission's case," said Thomas Vinje, an antitrust attorney with Clifford Chance in Brussels, Belgium. "Real has already provided evidence for the case, and that record is complete and in Luxembourg."

Vinje predicted the Commission will continue to scrutinize Microsoft's adherence to its ruling even though RealNetworks has dropped out. "Nothing changes," he said. "The EC will vigorously pursue this case as they had before. The only thing that happened is they did make Real's U.S. antitrust case go away."

The European Union's ruling requires Microsoft to provide key technical details to server software makers and to offer a version of Windows without Media Player. That was in part designed to help RealNetworks' competing RealPlayer application. (Microsoft has appealed the requirement to the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg, but no date has been set for a hearing.)

The Bank of Microsoft
Tuesday's announcement highlights the divide-and-conquer legal strategy Microsoft has doggedly followed while defending itself from antitrust claims. Though technical details of the settlements have varied, two things have remained constant: a fat check from Microsoft and a mandatory withdrawal from the European complaint process.

When Microsoft agreed to pay Novell $536 million last November, the condition was that Novell agree to drop out of the European proceedings. The same requirement attached to the $1.95 billion deal with Sun Microsystems and the $750 million peace treaty with AOL Time Warner. Microsoft also settled a lawsuit with IBM.

Big payouts
Microsoft has paid a pretty penny in the last few years settling notable legal cases, largely on antitrust issues.

$1.95 billion Sun Microsystems
$850 million IBM
$750 million AOL Time Warner
$536 million Novell
$460 million RealNetworks
$440 million InterTrust Technologies
$150 million Gateway
$23 million Be

Source: CNET News.com research

The Computer and Communications Industry Association--another critic that was a vocal agitator in Europe--also cashed a hefty check, and CCIA President Ed Black received a pay raise from $200,000 to nearly $1 million a year.

In a telephone interview Tuesday, Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith acknowledged that the European antitrust process may have spurred the RealNetworks lawsuit toward a settlement: "To some degree those hearings also helped to sharpen those issues."

Remaining Microsoft foes pursuing their complaints in Europe include VideoBanner.com (formerly AudioBanner.com), the Software and Information Industry Association in Washington, D.C., the Free Software Foundation Europe, and the European Committee for Interoperable Standards. FSF Europe says it is "worried that the loopholes in the (EU's March 2004) decision can be exploited by Microsoft's lawyers."

Future problems
For the world's most famous antitrust defendant, other possible legal woes remain.

EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes told The International Herald Tribune last month that: "We have had informal complaints, and we are using our time now to look at them. We're not going to wait and do nothing."

There's the Kai-Fu Lee case involving a bitter employment dispute with Google (which Microsoft characteristically offered to settle). A federal judge in Baltimore has permitted portions of a subsequent lawsuit filed by Novell to proceed.

Microsoft lost a round last month when the U.S. Patent Office reaffirmed the Eolas Web-browsing patent, and pen-computing pioneer Go sued Microsoft in July on antitrust grounds.

And the software titan remains such a tempting bull's-eye that it's likely to face a continued barrage of lawsuits, said one attorney who specializes in antitrust matters.

"They're a big company and have a dominate position in the OS business, so they will always be a target," the attorney said. Microsoft has been hit with antitrust lawsuits, including from Real Networks, over the bundling issue with Windows.

But it's unlikely the Justice Department or Federal Trade Commission will take action against the software giant for bundling issues, since the U.S. settlement already exists to address them, the attorney said. "I think the agencies will wait to see something more substantial, not the same music as in the old cases," said the attorney, who previously was an antitrust lawyer for the federal government.

CNET News.com's Ina Fried contributed to this report.


Join the conversation!
Add your comment
I'm glad to see so many of the lawsuits getting finished up. It's time all companies put their lawyers back in the drawer and started focusing on their products.

HOWEVER, I believe that Microsoft should unbundle IE and Media player from the OS. I'm not saying it can't be included just not innertwined with the OS. Here's why. First, having IE and WMP not part of the core os takes down on the chances of security problems. Second, it allows OEM's to include (without the other) a browser or media player of their choice.

Realistically allowing Microsoft to include by default, and with out a way to completely remove, IE and WMP you are in effect allowing them to control the browser and media player market.

Imagine this, if OEM's had the option of installing Firefox and Quicktime instead of IE and WMP, how long before Firefox made better headway. Of course you can insert your own browser and media player their. And yes I know those two can be installed by OEM's with out the need to unistall the other, but the point is if IE and WMP weren't avaliable by default to everybody how long before they weren't the majority?

My point is that their should be restrictions placed on any company that can use it's strong hold to unfairly block competition. With Microsoft that truly is IE and WMP. You have to ask yourself this question, if IE and WMP weren't apart of the OS itself and you had to download it would it be popular?
Posted by System Tyrant (1453 comments )
Reply Link Flag
You're right....
... and that's why MS won't do it.
Posted by Earl Benser (4310 comments )
Link Flag

Join the conversation

Add your comment

The posting of advertisements, profanity, or personal attacks is prohibited. Click here to review our Terms of Use.

What's Hot



RSS Feeds

Add headlines from CNET News to your homepage or feedreader.