Microsoft Set To Be Fined $2.4M a Day 777
Nexum writes "The BBC is reporting on a European Union threat to fine Microsoft up to $2.4m a day for their non-compliance with the European Commission's demand that Windows be opened up. Back in March 2004 Microsoft was ordered to open up its Windows operating system by way of making documentation available that would assist work on interoperability with other systems, specifically: 'non-Microsoft work group servers [should be able to] achieve full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers'. According to the article, Brussels has found MS to have not complied with the ruling, and, sounding somewhat exasperated, EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes has given MS a 5 week deadline before the $2.4m/a day fines begin."
Just dumb (Score:1, Insightful)
--
Get your Free MacMini here [freepay.com]
drop in the ocean (Score:5, Insightful)
it should be % based on their global income, that way it would "hurt" both large and small companies equally in terms of how badly they are affected by it.
still, should provide a bit of insentive for ms to hurry up and comply
Re:Wait what!? (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Just a question (Score:5, Insightful)
I think the question should rather be, would MS think not opening up Windows is worth $2.4M/day?
... I think it is...
Re:Just a question (Score:2, Insightful)
--
Get your Free MacMini here [freepay.com]
Re:Wait what!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Basically, the statement was "you won't avoid abusing your position yourself, so now we have to tell you how".
So when do they force car makers to open up their onboard computers?
Typical Europe (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:I'm sorry, I'm confused again. (Score:5, Insightful)
I left my cheat-sheet at home...
Today is "different people have different opinions" day. Same as any other day.
Glad I could clear up that confusion of yours.
Re:The trick (Score:2, Insightful)
And for the > 130 iq comment, he has a point too, put a linux livecd in a room with 1 computer and 10 monkeys and they'll probably succeed eventually, but it'll take a while
why? (Score:3, Insightful)
This is about as asinine as suing an open source company for making their code public...
Re:Just dumb (Score:3, Insightful)
You're just not getting it. The EU never said that Microsoft is required to sell Windows in Europe. If MS don't like the rules, they are perfectly free to take their ball and go home. In fact, I hope they do.
Re:Just dumb (Score:5, Insightful)
If they don't like the fact that they don't provide the documentation that they want, they should not buy their software in the first place.
Irrelevant - this is about competition, not past purchasing decisions. Microsoft either do what the EU says, or they pay the fines, OR they stop trading the EU. Simple.
Re:The trick (Score:1, Insightful)
EU's Infrastructure... (Score:2, Insightful)
Go ahead, mod me flamebait or overrated. But keep in mind that I administrate and work with both Linux and Windows for a living, and I actually have much more Windows experience and education under my belt. That being said, if I had a choice in the matter the servers I work with would be 100% *nix.
Re:Just dumb (Score:4, Insightful)
No, they just illegally maintained an effective monopoly on PC operating systems for many years. If they don't like the repercussions of their extended and deliberate illegal (and some would say immoral) actions, perhaps they should have complied with the court's verdict earlier. Or maybe just not done it in the first place...
Re:this is stupid (Score:2, Insightful)
The first scenario is that the EU decides that it's computers are so important that it will just use unauthorized copies.
The second, even worse scenario is that Europe would adopt Linux as it's primary OS. Once the EU starts using Linux the market for third-party Linux software will explode. This in turn will lead to the removal of the last show-stopper problems for Linux (whatever they might be).
Suddenly most of the reasons _not_ to use Linux in the USA would vaporize, and then MS would be in real trouble.
Thus, leaving the EU market would create just the kind of opportunity that Linux (and other OS'es) would need to become dominating.
Re:Wait what!? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Just a question (Score:0, Insightful)
Re:this is stupid (Score:5, Insightful)
This isn't stupid. When you do business in some foreign country, then you have to respect that countries laws. Earlier this week ABN AMRO, a large Dutch bank, was fined (in the USA) 80 M$ for violating USA banking laws.
If European businesses have to obey US law when doing business in the USA, then American businesses have to obey Europen law when doing business in Europe. And MS violated European laws repeatedly, so now they have to pay - just like any other compagny violating European laws.
After all, MS doesn't have to do business in Europe. If they don't like Europe and it's laws, then they are free to leave.
Re:Just a question (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Typical Europe (Score:2, Insightful)
Capitalism does not like monopolies. It is the government's job to make sure they don't get out of hand.
morons... (Score:2, Insightful)
Aside from the US (im assuming you idiots are Americans)the next major service industries full stop are in EU and yes the EU is actually a very very big place for both people and business numbers.
wake the hell up and get your American head out of your American Ass.
Could someone explain to me... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:Wait what!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:MOD PARENT UP! (Score:5, Insightful)
>but keeping this information to themselves is something that has been done in the computer industry since the beginning.
"Something's right because we've always done it this way" is never a valid argument.
>I can't believe the EU would be so fascist as to compel Microsoft to release this information... and with a fine post-dated to Dec 15!!
Better believe it...
>Microsoft should suspend all sales of Windows and Office until this is resolved.
Sure, and lose hundreds of millions of revenue, instead of a few million due to fines. It's not like they're stopping development - they would stop selling software for which most of the costs have already been incurred... that'd just be dumb.
> Europe is much more heavily dependent on windows than the US... they would most definitely feel the pinch.
What are you basing that on? Seems I see a lot more Linux headlines about Germany/Norway/Sweden/whereever than about the States...
> Hell they might be able to talk Apple into joining the boycott...
Yeah, sure. Maybe they'll even convince Apple to curl up and die.
bad ruling. (Score:2, Insightful)
This is equal to a habitual speeder getting pulled over for the 10th time in a month, and the penalty is his wife can no longer work. The justification; she makes allot of money and bought him the car. Should we tell MS that they can no longer sell Office unless they give Open Office their source code too?
MS server api/code being required to be exposed is border line criminal in my opinion. This is MS IP (good or bad it's theirs), and forcing an Open Source model on the world is a dangerous road... regardless of your opinion on OSS.
This is an attempt to throw a bone at competitors of Microsoft (e.g. Novell, various Linux distros, UNIX, etc.), but it doesn't help the companies that were hurt by the monopoly abuse (e.g. Netscape and Real, of course they settled out of court). The fact that the foes of Microsoft resort to beating them on the server front like this just goes to show you that MS really has made a good product with Windows 2003. This decision may help the Linux community play ball in a windows world, but that punishment has nothing to do with the crime.
The cold hard truth is that this has very little to do with MS or monopolies. The EU is just trying to hurt the US economy by hurting the largest American company. They fined them about a billion dollars already, XP N, and various other penalties.
Again, Microsoft did not abuse their monopoly with any version of the server systems (not to mention they charge allot for it). They got big market share quickly because the small to medium sized companies were ignored by Novell and Sun (major players at the time). NT 3.51 and NT 4 gave MS a large market share because they targeted a group that needed the systems, but had been ignored until then. Small companies get big, and when they did they already were using MS... so they stuck with it. It was a good strategy, and not illegal. Novell's bad business moves aren't Microsoft's fault.
Flame me if you want, but this is a bad ruling.
Re:End of proprietary code? (Score:3, Insightful)
- They are convicted of abusing their monopoly in one market to force their way into other markets, and thus are subject to stricter rules than companies that are not monopolies.
- The terms of 'opening up' cover API documentation and guaranteeing interoperability with other proprietary vendors as well as Free Software. NOT opening the source code.
Ergo: this doesn't impact proprietary software at all. Non-monopolists are perfectly allowed not to document their APIs. Microsoft can keep their sacred source code closed.
What they are asked to do is pay up until they open their specs.
~phil
WOW, I got a 130 IQ or higher (Score:5, Insightful)
Odd thing, for some reason a lot more people then a few percent seemed to be able to work with Linux long before Windows ever made an appearance. Of course they called it unix in those days but what's in a name?
Earlier computer systems were even more primitive and being operated NOT by MIT graduates but by a girl promoted from the typing pool. For that matter how do you think the earliest word processors and such worked? Point and click? Nor were they being used by harvard graduates. Just girls with barely a diploma in home economics.
Nah, linux is easy. It is just called hard by the amazingly lazy who do not want to be bothered having to relearn their leet button clicking skills.
In the real world, people have used all kinds of systems and continue to do so. You would be suprised how many companies still run their essential software via ancient telnet terminals that make you wish you were running DOS (oh okay maybe not DOS).
Here is a tip for succesfull management of your employees. Do not hire people with skills if office package X (and that includes oOO). Hire people with an average intelligence and tell them I pay your wages, I choose the software, here is a manual. Any person with a IQ above room temperature will get the hint.
Re:Wait what!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Unlike in the US , where Boeing and other american aerospace
contractors are never given preferential treatment over foreign
ones in government contracts. Oh no. And er , oh , what about Iraq
where EU corperations were squeezed out of the bidding for the
rebuilding contracts , which , (and this is a complete surprise),
are almost all american! Well what next? US trade import tarifs?
US steel market protectionism? Nah , would never happen.
Re:Just dumb (Score:4, Insightful)
i don't think it's that simple ... besides, in this 'war of proprietary vs open' ...
Proprietary versus open is not part of this debate.
It is that simple - we're talking about punishment for anti-competitive behaviour. PUNISHMENT FOR A CRIME. For the reasons you outlined it is in Microsoft's interests (the EU is a huge and lucrative market to Microsoft) to acquiesce to the EU's demands.
Re:The trick (Score:3, Insightful)
How is this modded flamebait? It so very true.
You'd have to be a moron to think MS has the option of "going home." If they were to declare their products no longer for sale in the EU and pull all their employees out and try to sell all their holdings there, the EU would order the company split up immediately and MS-USA would have to compete with MS-Europe which would hold all the intellectual property rights there. They are a convicted, abusive monopoly. Trying to avoid a punishment by the courts does not work, because the courts have all the power in their jurisdiction.
Re:Wait what!? (Score:3, Insightful)
Down the line? What bubble are you living in? The EU and the US have these sort of pissing contests all the time. It rarely makes the front page, but it's the single most defining trait of the transatlantic relationship. Pick up any copy of the Economist to see what the latest one is. Typing "EU US trade disputes" into Google returns 4.2 million hits.
If the shoe was on the other foot... (Score:5, Insightful)
If Apache was closed-source and used a proprietary protocol, Firefox was closed-source, and Apache and Firefox were developed by the same company - providing seamless integration between the two - and if Microsoft was given no help to allow its browser to operate with Apache, I'm sure that Bill Gates wouldn't just sit down and say "Ah well, fair's fair."
Microsoft has had plenty of time to address similar issues that it has brought about, and the company knew of the consequences.
What's to complain about?
What other option does the EU have?
Re:Just a question (Score:5, Insightful)
Are you asking what gives the EU jurisdiction to collect on the fine?
What's with the pro-MS sentiment today? (Score:4, Insightful)
The EU wants MS to open up their protocols and fileformats to allow fair competition. Aren't open standards what everyone here wants in the end? This 2.4M/day fine is just because MS isn't listening, the EU has fined MS before. This is the EU's way of saying: open up your protocols, your fileformats and your system or we'll force you to. Fines and legislation are the only way the EU can slowly force MS into accepting this fact.
I can't wait for the day that MS publishes actual complete documentation on implementing NTFS or communicating with an Exchange server. That is the day that we, the people, say that we won't stand for closed standards anymore.
Re:Europe ain't all that (Score:4, Insightful)
Three words:
Follow. The. Money.
In the medium term it doesn't matter to the commercial software market how many Indians and Chinese there are, but how many individuals in any given region can afford to license which software.
There aren't enough Chinese or Indians who can afford Microsoft Office or Windows for MS to make up for leaving the EU, so they will stay.
Incidentally, there are plenty of opportunities in those 2 markets for localised Linux distros due to lower costs and long-standing governmental distrust of the US, which reflects back on MS.
Re:Wait what!? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:EU's Infrastructure... (Score:2, Insightful)
How about instead we just ask you to justify those claims?
-=- mf
Re:The trick (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:exactly.. they should pull windows (Score:5, Insightful)
Many people are heavily dependent on Windows.
It's not because Windows is so superior, it's due to the lock-in situation proprietary file formats, protocols and APIs have brought about.
That's why the EU wants to put a stop to it.
Re:EU's Infrastructure... (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:The trick (Score:1, Insightful)
You apparently have not met many users. Users are the folks who would rather have to use the same ass-backwards workarounds and the same crashing software day after day than to change their computer ritual for something easier.
Linux is very much in the same league as Windows and OSX when it comes to regular users doing normal things on their computers. It is several leagues ahead for advanced users. It's the intermediate users you're thinking of who will have trouble adapting.
Your history/education with Windows is without a doubt what gives it the edge for you. Maintaining a diesel engine is actually much easier than maintaining a gasoline engine, but if you've never seen one before, you're just going to take it to the mechanic.
2) People don't want to learn an OS or customize it to make it work for them. They don't mind (too much) learning the *application* (Photoshop, Word, whatever) because that's what that is considered productive - "I made a picture", "I typed an email". Learning an OS doesn't give regular users any satisfaction at all.
No, they don't want to. But they did when they learned Windows. And they did when they switched to OSX. People will change when the system offers them something they value. The "mass migration to Linux" is no longer a programmer's problem. It's no longer an issue for interface designers. The Linux Desktop is done. Ready to ship. Now it's just time to maintain it, improve it, and wait while businesses deploy it or don't deploy it. Perhaps that "something of value" will be that it's what they're used to from work or school.Re:Just a question (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:This is why I am not in favour of the EU (Score:4, Insightful)
Microsoft, no matter how many people hate them, should not be penalised for being a sucessful business.
Agreed. They should be punished for breaking the law, which, coincidentally, is what they are being punished for.
There are plenty of alternatives to their product.
And here you make a incredibly common mistake. Monopolies are defined by markets, not products. No one else sells a significant number of desktop OS's and makes a profit doing so. All companies that have tried have gone out of business. IBM and many others sell services and include an OS. Apple and many others sell hardware and include an OS. Who, aside from MS, sells OS's and makes a profit?
Lets fine apple for making people with ipods (a monopoly) download itunes, which now comes with quicktime.
One, ipods have about 70% of the market. That is not a monopoly. Two, Apple's quicktime competes against MS Media player, which is bundled with a monopolized product.
Lets fine sony (or X,Y,Z) for not playing songs downloaded by itunes.
...because Sony has a monopoly on what, that they have abused how?
Lets fine apple for not allowing other mp3 player play songs downloaded by itunes.
If Apple were to gain a monopoly on music downloads, and use that to gain a monopoly on players, then yes lets fine them. Last I heard, however, they were nowhere near having a monopoly and dozens of other companies, including MS, Walmart, and Sony offered similar services.
Lets fine KFC for not telling us the secret ingredient in the batter for the fried chicken, as some little take-away next door is suffering.
First, KFC does not have a monopoly on anything. Second, having a monopoly is not illegal. Having a monopoly and using it to get another monopoly is illegal. So as soon as KFC is the only company making money selling fried chicken and they start giving away free whatever with that chicken, the courts should step in on behalf of whatever sellers.
How can someone come up with opinions like yours without understanding the basics of monopolies, bundling, anti-trust law, or this particular case? How can you have not even tried to use Google to research this at all, or read any opposing opinions on it that might inform you? Do you just randomly spout uninformed opinions about everything?
Re:remove your panties from your ass (Score:2, Insightful)
>> I don't know when they were put there. MS has
>> been around longer than most Software laws.
Uh, it's not software laws, it's anti-trust laws. They've been around for a while...
Re:Just a question (Score:1, Insightful)
In which case the EU will compulsorily llicense it. You have heard of compulsory licensing before I guess? If a software company decides to push around the EU (or for that matter, the US or China or any other serious Power) then said company will fail. It is trivial to take the software and, if the company is run by imbecilies who decide to provoke governments into doing that then governments will do it. It's what governments do.
Europe (Score:5, Insightful)
I work for a company that sells hardware and software, and the demand for more Linux support has gone up dramatically from overseas - and we're responding with success.
I personally think that their Linux requests are a bit out of spite (they have MS contracts, the project managers involved are just sick of Microsoft) -- but whichever way you cut it, Microsoft should probably begin playing nice because that's where they're going to lose customers. And Korea.
Re:EU should RTFM (Score:2, Insightful)
Yes, but are they bundled into the OS's core? can you quickly and easily remove tem without crippling your system?
On a Mac OS X, you simply delete the app.folder, on a Linux box you "apt-get remove" (or similar). On Windows, however, if you try to remove Windows Media Player or Internet Explorer, they're still there! And removing them by hand is not particularly wise.
Re:EU should RTFM (Score:5, Insightful)
- Apple is not a convicted monopolist
- RedHat is not a convicted monopolist
- SuSE is not a convicted monopolist
Microsoft *is* a convicted monopolist, that is why they are being fined. They are being fined because they are using their desktop monopoly to force out competitors in other markets, such as the server market. Additionally, they are using their desktop monopoly to cross subsidise their entries into other markets and sell things like the XBox below cost price, which will eventually force other competitors without the luxury of using a monopoly to subsidise their games market to exit the market.
Linux distros, on the other hand, use open and documented protocols. It is no problem using a Sun Solaris NIS and NFS server with a Linux desktop client, or a Linux server with a Sun Solaris desktop client. RedHat and SuSE do not have desktop monopolies which they use to lock out competitors from the server market (and vice versa).
Additionally, MSDN doesn't exactly document the proprietary and non-standard extensions to Kerberos that prevent anyone other than Microsoft from creating a server that can provide Active Directory to Windows clients.
Microsoft would not be being fined if their business conduct did not include using their Windows monopoly to subsidise their entry into other markets. It is not fair game for MS to counter sue for bias and prejudice because there is no bias and prejudice - all the other people you cite do not use Microsoft business practises.
What If??? (Score:2, Insightful)
i.e.
- Stop shipping Windows operating systems to anyone in the EU.
- Pull all Microsoft products from store shelves. Windows, MSOffice, etc., etc., etc.
- Invalidate all EU software licenses.
- Cut off support for all EU customers.
- Close any MS Offices located in the EU, laying off all the workers.
- Stage the worlds largest media campaign blasting the EU publicly and stating any nations that pull out of the EU will be instantly re-instated and trade will begin anew.
This would cost Microsoft hundreds of millions and would effect their stock price, but they would recover and would still be making good money. The subsequent public backlash against the EU would be enormous and would hurt the EU economy much more then it will hurt Microsoft. Suddenly all businesses in the EU will be stuck not able to get updates or even patches and zero support. It is not realistic for the EU businesses to migrate to Apple or even Linux. Seeing that Office for the Mac would also be pulled, the only choice being OpenOffice which is not a great choice yet.
There is no law that states Microsoft has to bend over and take it in the EU. There is no law that states they must sell product to EU nations.
Personally, I hate Microsoft, but I hate the EU even more! Were any other company treated the way Microsoft has been treated by the EU; they would have left a long long time ago. As much as I hate Microsoft I hate liberalism, socialism, multi-culturism, and large government even more. I would love to see MS smackdown the EU, it would be an enormous event. What good is Monopoly power if you are not willing to use the power?
What hurts... (Score:5, Insightful)
Obligatory Simpsons ref: Mr. Burns is hauled into court for dumping nuclear waste in the city park. He's fined $3 million. He whips out his checkbook and says, "I'll take that statue of justice too!"
Re:The Difference (Score:4, Insightful)
Two different companies teaming up and not allowing a third vendor in is wrong
So, basically, you're pointing out a flaw in the legal system.
Look at the following situations:
1) Different companies work together and lock everybody else out: illegal
2) One company has different products working together and locks everybody else out: legal
What's the best thing to do if you're faced with situation #1?
Answer: Both companies join together and everything is OK; the competition is screwed, and another monopoly rules the roost.
Re:Just a question (Score:3, Insightful)
ha! This is slashdot!
The entire Linux community will weep tears of joy. Linux (or opensource) will gain alot of skilled developers, developers, developers, developers, developers, Linux will gain usability as it would be used in the business and user culture (more time spent in improving the software, making it more usable). Which will result in MS losing grip on the market (and becoming isolated with the incomptabilities) as there would be a solid base of technology developed in Europe (and because it'd be free, spreading over the world).
MS isn't going to let Europe go, it'd be their downfall.
Re:EU should RTFM-American decisions (Score:4, Insightful)
May be impossible (Score:3, Insightful)
It's my opinion tha they could do the *very best they possibly could* to release the specifications for their APIs, and while it would help, it still wouldn't give anyone much more ability to interoperate than they currently have, because the documentation will be wrong.
Microsoft has a huge incentive to get their developer's documentation correct, and yet MSDN is rife with errors and omissions.
Re:Just a question (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Same old EU whining (Score:3, Insightful)