Microsoft To Be Fined E500M By European Union? 1029
An anonymous reader writes "According to a Reuters story, the European Commission is in the process of fining Microsoft 497 million Euros ($613 million). The most important reason for the fine was the refusal by Microsoft to share more information about its products with competitors. Mario Monti, the EU competition commissioner, decided to impose the fine after talks with Microsoft broke down last week." The last estimate was a mere 100 million Euros, and it's noted: "If the full European Commission backs the fine as expected on Wednesday it would exceed the 462 million euro penalty imposed on Hoffman-La Roche AG in 2001 for being ringleader of a vitamin cartel."
Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:4, Funny)
~ The Timeline ~
March 25, 2004 Microsoft fined E497M by the EU.
April 05, 2004 Microsoft files appeal.
June 11, 2004 Verdict upheld.
June 22, 2004 Microsoft contributes heavily to the Republican party.
July 05, 2004 EU declared part of the "Axis of Evil"
July 13, 2004 Colin Powell declares the EU has "Weapons of mass destruction, without a doubt."
July 27, 2004 US troops roll into the EU to promote Bush's "World Liberation '04" re-election campaign.
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:4, Funny)
And he'd be right about WMD (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:And he'd be right about WMD (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Oh, please... (Score:5, Insightful)
That's quite a logical leap in four years. It's possible that Iraq developed the aforementioned weapons in four years, but based on what the troops found in the country, such a program would be in its infancy at best.
Re:Oh, please... (Score:4, Informative)
He did not have any sort of a program in it's infancy. He used to have lots of chemical weapons (we gave him the knowhow). He used them during the Reagan Admnistration (you may want to read up on that).
After the first gulf war he was ordered to dismantle both his nuclear programs and his stockpiles of chemical weapons. He destroyed the nuclear program under the watch of the weapons inspectors. Both Hans Blix and Mohammed albredaei (sp?) have documented this phase. They also claim that they destroyed all the chemical weapons but not all of the destruction was documented. That's why a second round of inspections were ordered. During those inspections every single scientist interviewed stated that they destroyed the chemicals. They told the inspectors where the destruction took place. The inspectors found evidence of destruction but it was impossible to determine exactly how much was destroyed.
Those are the facts. I know they don't fit everybodies ideology but they are facts nevertheless.
It may be that not all the weapons were destroyed but it's highly unlikely that those chemicals are still viable. Even if they exist they are probably inert by now. If he had them we would have used them.
Re:Oh, please... (Score:5, Insightful)
Bush had different policy goals. He wanted to invade and occupy iraq and was not content to merely contain saddam. His motivations were complex (oil, his father, biblical prophecy, US hegemony etc) but he knew from day one that he wanted to control iraq totally and absolutely. He too accomplished what he wanted even though it cost lots of money and lots of lives.
In the end both Clinton and Bush were looking out for their own interests. The interests of the Iraqis was and remains totally irrelevent.
If Bush had stood up before 9/11 and said "The US will use it's wealth, power and military might to end opression in the world and to destroy all dictators" I would be lining up to give him money and support. If he had said "we will deliver democracy to everybody and free everybody from the chains of opression and bondage no matter what it costs in lives and money" I would walk around my town begging people to vote for him.
He didn't say that because that's never been his goal. He will not lift a finger to deliver freedom to chechnians, palestenians, africans, tibetians, chinese, and the tens of millions of people suffering all over the world because they don't have something he wants.
I am still waiting for somebody (anybody) to explain to me why the Iraqi people deserved socialism more then any other people on the planet. Why they had to be delivered from evil first. It seems to me that your average north korean is and has been much more opressed. The average chechnians is much poorer, the average east timorese has suffered much more death and bloodshed, the average tibetians much more misery and ethnic cleansing. Too bad none of them have oil, too bad the bible makes no mention of them, too bad none of their leaders tried to kill his father.
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:3, Insightful)
As for the verdict, having things go through courts all over the nation has good and bad consequences. Sure, the fine is a Good Thing because Microsoft deserves to be fined, since they ripped people off and have engaged in unfair, illegal competitive practices, and W's administration did not allow them to be brought to justice. But Microsoft, at the same
Comment removed (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:5, Insightful)
Even if so-and-so did something really wrong decades ago, how does that apply to any of us living today anyway? Most Americans disagree on tons of issues... and the same applies to Europeans. Generalizing the will of either "side" into what dumb politicians say is unfair to both.
How about we just talk about our common interests like computers instead of showing too much misplaced nationalistic pride?
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:4, Informative)
Why on earth did you get moderated "flamebait"?
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:5, Funny)
Yeah, but those other ten countries aren't stupid enough to pay $600 for toilet seats.
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:5, Funny)
Yes, only an idiot would do that, right?
Oh, wait...
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:5, Informative)
Hmm...
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:4, Funny)
Re:Peering into my crystal ball... (Score:5, Interesting)
CORRECTION: Once you include the cost for Iraq, the US military budget is greater than all the worlds military budgets combined. [cdi.org] The USA=$399 Billion plus the $75 to $100 billion in Iraq is to be determined; versus the rest of the world with at $463 billion.
Ominous (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Ominous (Score:5, Funny)
So, what does a vitamin cartel do anyway? Do they price fix Iron suppliments or something? Or do they beat up the small iron works for trademark violation?
I'm really curious.
-CPM
Re:Ominous (Score:5, Informative)
Simple as that.
Re:Ominous (Score:5, Informative)
Yes--there was price-fixing in vitamins (Score:5, Informative)
Nope--there was nothing funny at all about the price-fixing in vitamins led by Hoffman-LaRoche. I know a manager at a local plant of Hoffman-LaRoche, and used to work (in a different industry) with a man who at one point was HLR's general manager of animal vitamins. So I've heard about the court case (which went on for years, and included anti-trust action in the EU and in the United States, and possibly elsewhere).
Is price-fixing in vitamins a big deal?
First, we're not talking about somebody trying to corner the market in One-A-Day tablets. We're talking about a small group of chemical companies colluding to fix the prices of (and markets for) vitamins that are included in food products. That's things like the Vitamin D in your milk. And--more significantly in terms of market size--it is the vitamin supplements included in animal feeds.
A brief discussion of animal feed
I am a geek--but I am a geek who is heavily involved in 4-H (non-U.S. readers: 4-H is a program for American youth [mostly farm youth] funded by the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture.) People who are feeding animals frequently want to feed a "complete" feed--a feed that includes all of the nutrients an animal requires. Example: dog food. You don't want Bowser running down kids in the neighborhood to supplement the meager protein requirement you feed him: you want him to get all the nutrition he requires from his bowl. In the same way, most cat owners don't want little Fiona sneaking out to hunt down the local rodent population just because there isn't enough "meat, and meat byproducts" in her Fancy Feast. (In case you're curious, a "meat byproduct" is what goes crunch when little Fiona does manage to eat one of the local rodents.)
Are you with me so far? If you live in the urban jungle you may not think of animal feeds beyond dogs and cats. And while that business is not small [purina.com], there is also a huge business in other animal feeds [basf.com]. Think of cows, horses, chickens, and turkeys. In a nutshell, "chicken feed isn't chicken feed." Animal feeds are a multi-billion dollar business--and a major cost component for a feed manufacturer is the cost of the vitamin supplements included in the feed.
So the manufacturers get together...
It has been illegal for many years, in the United States, for manufacturers to compare prices or sales practices for common customers. But price and/or market collusion was not illegal in many other countries--and a number of multinational companies got a bit clever. If it wasn't illegal to collude on pricing in Switzerland (and in the 1980s it was not) you simply met with your counterparts in Switzerland, agreed on your prices and markets, and shook hands. According to a friend who was involved in some of these meetings (in Switzerland) everybody benefited: the people involved made their sales quotas, kept their profits up, and were spared the headaches of having to endure real competition. Sure--the customers (and ultimately the consumer) got rooked, but that was a "political issue." My friend (a U.K. citizen) assured me that Americans were far too zealous about such things. All of that ended when the U.S. government found out about it--Hoffman LaRoche, a Swiss company, settled for $500 million; BASF ("we don't make the products you buy, we just make them cost more") agreed to a fine of $250 million; other companies involved paid lesser amounts.
Want to know more?
One of the really cool things about the Web in general, and SlashDot in particular, is the ability to click on a link and go off on a tangent--learning something you'd never even thought of before. This link [lieffcabraser.com] connects to a law firm involved in the matter.
E500M (Score:5, Funny)
Re:E500M (Score:5, Interesting)
"This, Windows 98 Super Ultra Deluxe Supremely Cool Second Edition is valued at 250 Million Euros, and thus for our settlement... we give you two copies... enjoy"
Course... that assumes the EU agrees to such terms.
Re:E500M (Score:5, Funny)
that assumes the EU agrees to such terms.
The EU would never agree to such terms! What, you think we're backward in "old" Europe? We'd want at least 15 copies! And one for our mate Turkey, too!
Re:E500M (Score:4, Funny)
Yay! Tax rebates! (Score:3, Funny)
Hang on. This is all going to pay for around 4 days of the CAP. Big deal.
Drop in the bucket (Score:5, Interesting)
The fine amounts to slightly more than one percent of Microsoft's roughly $53 billion cash on hand and did not impress analysts and critics.
"This is a traffic ticket for Microsoft," said Thomas Vinje of Clifford Chance, who represents Microsoft critics.
Neil Macehiter, an analyst with London-based technology research firm Ovum, said even a $3 billion fine would have been "an irritant to Microsoft but certainly wouldn't break the bank."
It's not about putting them out of business. (Score:5, Insightful)
If Microsoft doesn't change its practices, we can see more fines such as this. Eventually, Microsoft will change.
Re:It's not about putting them out of business. (Score:4, Insightful)
OK, but do we really want to give politicians, that most organized cadre of criminals, the idea that they can raise funds by fining companines?
You can't put a company in jail, so how else do you make it behave except to take the one thing (money) that matters to the company? Microsoft has been publicly wrist-slapped in the past with no apparent result. I still prefer the rule of our elected officials to the rule of our unelected corporate overlords.
Re:Drop in the bucket (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, yes, and it's probably intended to be. Traffic tickets are not intended to end life as you know it, nor would a regulatory fine be intended to put a company out of business. Monopoly or not, it would not be in the EU's best interests for Microsoft to suddenly go belly up, or to abandon the European market because it's become unprofitable, thereby leaving all those currently using MS software in the lurch, support-wise, and out of all their license money that's guaranteed them future upgrades.
The "slap on the wrist" analogy is often used to show that a penalty is too light, but in fact the whole point of a slap on the wrist is to get your attention and change your way of thinking and acting. Traffic tickets do not usually bankrupt anybody but hopefully they will get you to follow the law. They are an annoyance and one that most people would rather not deal with. And the only real way you eliminate the risk of receiving one is by obeying the law.
So if this is seen as a traffic ticket, good. The penalty will have done its job.
Re:Drop in the bucket (Score:4, Interesting)
You must not drive around Seattle much. =)
However, this analogy is rather apt; in (Montana I believe) the cops are allowed to collect speeding tickets on the spot in the form of cash. People have taken to keeping a fifty on the dash so that they can speed through the state, and just pay the fine if they get caught (I don't blame them).
This settlement amounts to the same thing - as long as you have the cash, keep doing what you've been doing.
True enough but this is a traffic ticket to B.Gate (Score:4, Interesting)
A fine should at least make it unprofitable for me to commit the crime again. If I stole 1 million and was fined 1000 then that is not exactly going to stop me is it? So how much did MS make by violating the law? More then 500 million? Then they ain't gonna stop.
Re:True enough but this is a traffic ticket to B.G (Score:4, Insightful)
Yes, this is exactly the problem. Where I live, there is a suburb that has repeatedly dumped raw sewage into the river that runs through the city rather than send it to a waste processing facility because the EPA fine is less than the cost of the treatment. There is no incentive for the city to stop doing this as long as it costs less.
The same analogy applies to Microsoft. If they make more by squeezing out the competition unfairly than they lose in fines, it's still a net gain for them overall and the next time around, there's fewer players to have to squeeze out. It's a win-win for them and a lose for everyone else (except the custodians of the fine money, it seems).
Nice to see some backbone (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:Nice to see some backbone (Score:5, Interesting)
Seems to me Microsoft might as well start playing hardball here - Drop the price of an Xbox to $0, offer tracks on the new music service for $0.50, charge $10 or give away copies of Enterprise Architect, take a few high profile clients and offer huge discounts for OS and Office site licenses.
If they don't, they will be accused of being monopolists anyway, leading to more and more fines, (just where does the money from fines go?) and more bad publicity. Since there is now a populist appeal to going after the company, they might as well create counter sentiment buy really becoming popular with consumers.
Microsoft doesn't have a business problem - it has a political problem. Anti-trust cases are inherently political, so we shall see if they learn to play that game. I still don't believe Microsoft is any more of a monopoly than Intel, but Intel knows how to play the game.
Re:Nice to see some backbone (Score:3, Redundant)
Priceless. I take it you don't realize selling everything other than Windows and Office at a loss (bundling Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player into the OS, making them "free") to drive competition out of busine
Re:Nice to see some backbone (Score:4, Interesting)
Compared with the terms of the USDOJ settlement, this is nice to see. Could have the punishment here been harsher? Certainly. Should have it been harsher? Possibly. Is a 500m euro file harsher punishment than a US settlement that allows donations of a monopoly's product in partial lieu of payments? Definitely.
Fines are nice, (Score:3, Interesting)
Doubtful.
Re:Fines are nice, (Score:3, Insightful)
just curious (Score:4, Interesting)
or is there some international law that says MS MUST comply?
not a troll, just some questions, as IANAL.
Re:just curious (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:just curious (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:just curious (Score:5, Informative)
You're joking, right? Could you imagine the panic that would ensue if Microsoft tanked in one night? My god, it would be like the apocalypse hit Wall Street.
The economy is not all about good products and services being dealt at a fair price. In fact, it's 99% about confidence that that's what's happening. And an AWFUL lot of people are confident that that is what Microsoft is doing. If that confidence was suddenly undermined, the ensuing whirlpool could take an awful lot down the drain before things got back under control. Microsoft needs to be brought down to size the way IBM was - competition needs to wittle it down slowly to the point where it's size and market power reflect the quality and value of its offerings. A sudden disastrous strike taking it out could have horrible consequences.
Re:just curious (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:just curious (Score:3, Informative)
Microsoft would have to be run by a bunch of muppets to do that. The $600 Million fine represents 3 Million copies of Windows XP Home sold at $200 a piece that they have to sell. I'm sure there are more then 3 Million computers in Europe for them to make back their money eventually. However, if they pulled out comp
Re:just curious (Score:5, Informative)
The european market is worth a hell of a lot more than they're being fined - they'll pay up, just to protect the right to sell in that market. Can you imagine the knock-on effects of not being able to sell to the EU? We'd develop our own apps and OS (or use one that someone had conveniently written and given away free...), that'd become the defacto standard in Europe, and would murder the MS monopoly elsewhere because they couldn't force Office upgrades on people any more... Aint gonna happen - BG isn't that stupid.
Re:just curious (Score:5, Insightful)
Yes. And also give up what 30-40% of their bottom-line.. Which is a LOT more than that puny fee.
but who would be more injured by such a move, MS or the EU?
Microsoft would be killed by it. Several hundred million europeans would be forced to switch OS and application software.
That'd get the Linux ball rolling, and how!
Re:just curious (Score:3, Insightful)
The European market is about the same size as the US one at least in terms of overall size. So they are not just going to say bye to that...
but who would be more injured by such a move, MS or the EU?
Microsoft. By a loooooong way.
Windows source code as an asset (Score:5, Interesting)
Microsoft traditionally outsources most of their development, so there is no reason to think that the new company couldn't continue development. Possibly with the same Indian developers as are working on the Microsoft code
Maybe they will even open source it to fix the bugs
Doubt it (Score:4, Insightful)
I'm pretty sure that would be a violation of international law. I don't believe there's anything in international law that allows governments to seize copyrights as remediation in lieu of fines. I'm also pretty sure that MS made it so that no one who participates in Shared Source can do anything worth a damn for similar reasons as you outline.
E500M? We got that covered. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:E500M? We got that covered. (Score:3, Funny)
No Media Player! (Score:5, Informative)
Re:No Media Player! (Score:4, Informative)
Media Player Classic 6.4.8.0 [sourceforge.net]
vitamin cartel? (Score:5, Funny)
Yay! (Score:4, Interesting)
It almost restores your faith in humanity. Almost.
Re:Yay! (Score:3, Informative)
Actually some background:
There was a string of high profile EU comission decisions to be overturned or stayed by the court.
As a result this time the comission is doing it by the book. This is the reason why it is asking that all competition authorities in all states agree unanimously on the penalties and the penalties are OK not just per EU statutes, but per the statutes of the individual states.
So, to summarize, they are making an example out of MSFT. Th
Re:Yay! (Score:5, Informative)
Quote from Bill Gates... (Score:3, Funny)
The real question is ... (Score:5, Interesting)
With $53 billion in the coffers, $613 million is a big ol' slap on the wrist.
Re:The real question is ... (Score:3, Informative)
don't any of you understand that this isn't THE END.
if MS doesn't change, they get another $600 million fine. and another. and another. and guess what, 53 billion is a lot, but it's still finite.
Smart Reporters (Score:5, Funny)
The problem with Antitrust (Score:5, Interesting)
In other words, the actual software that these laws protects is horrible stuff like RealOne and Quicktime. Open source projects can't afford to license things. I'll be even more impressed than I already am if Mplayer and the like can continue their higher quality in the face of such crappy capitalistic laws.
Re:The problem with Antitrust (Score:3, Insightful)
Given that it takes over the MIME type for (amongst other things) PNG images when it installs on Windows, and their implementation is more broken than IE's implementation, I'd consider it "horrible stuff".
steps to profit... (Score:5, Funny)
Step 2) Profit! ($40 Billion in cash)
Step 3) Get fined $0.5 Billion for being naughty
Step 4) More profit!
Value of fine benefits of bad behavior. Bad behavior continues...
Sigh.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:Sigh.... (Score:5, Insightful)
Well, actually governments are already dictating to motor companies how they should design and manufacture their cars (by enforcing safety and emission standards). In a similar manner they also dictate to electronic companies how they should design and manufacture their appliances (once again, by enforcing standards), and the list of the things they are dictating to construction companies is endless. So... what is so strange, actually, in government-enforced standards in computing? I think it is inevitable, sooner or later. The old joke "what if Microsoft build cars" [brocku.ca] has a grain of truth in it. Unlike cars, there are no mandatory crash tests for software. And it shows.
Re:Sigh.... (Score:5, Informative)
Granparent post says the file formats should be released as an ECMA standard so people who have 10 years worth of documents in a proprietary MS standard format can switch to a competitor with out worrying about losing their documents.
Open Standards == competition. Closed Standards == exploitation of monopoly.
If two products can read and write the same file interchangebly then the two products can compete. If not they can't. Plain and simple. MS is all about making proprietary de-facto standards and using them to eliminate the competition.
A Free Market based on Competition does not exist at present. Having MS release their file formats (and Client-Server communication protocols) as an open standard would restore the Free Market. Releasing the format does not, in any way, tell them how to design or implement their software.
What is MS afraid of? Competition?
Oversimplification and exaggeration (Score:3, Insightful)
I'm not saying that fully open file formats wouldn't help - just that they are not necessarily the central issue.
Having MS release their file formats (and Client-Server communication protocols) as an open standard would resto
What about the problem !!! (Score:3, Interesting)
Where does this money go? (Score:5, Insightful)
If they could charge more, why aren't they? (Score:3, Insightful)
Monopolies charge what the market will bear. This fine doesn't impact what the market will bear, so it shouldn't affect prices. Monopolies set prices at the level where any increase in price would decrease profits. They have no incentive to set it lower, and it would be stupid to set it higher (as it would decrease profits).
Think of it from the other perspective. If a company received a sudden windfall of money, would you expec
more antitrust lawsuits agains Microsoft? (Score:5, Informative)
The current ruling could set a useful precedent... with someone finally having the guts to intervene against illegal abuse of monopolies [com.com], Microsoft may finally have to pay for the damage it has done to the software industry [nwsource.com] and users [lugod.org]
The real penalty (Score:4, Insightful)
Inapproriate? Hardly. (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm sorry, but if you trade into the EU, then you are expected to obey the laws of that market. Doesn't matter where the head office is. I'd have thought that Bill would employ lawyers with a clue - at least enough of a clue not to make a stupid statement like this.
Re:Inapproriate? Hardly. (Score:3, Interesting)
In the real world, companies have to operate under the laws of every country they operate in. If you open up a Saudi Arabian branch of your company, you can't make advertisements there with scantily-clad women, and complain when the Religious Police shut down your operations there that t
613 Million is a joke to Microsoft (Score:3, Insightful)
Who'd get the money? (Score:3, Insightful)
Think of it as affirmative action for European tech companies that were kept down by "the man." This could help equalize the playing field again!
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
historically speaking (Score:4, Insightful)
other options (Score:5, Insightful)
Fines are a weak response, as it has been stated over again, this is piss in a pond to the likes of Microsoft.
On the other hand, the European Commission has the power under Article 81 and 82 of the EC Treaty (which where anti-competitive behaviour is prohibited) to impose structural remedies: to insist upon corporate re-organisation or say an order to disclose information or to unbundle software. This would be a far more appropriate remedy that would actually be economically useful rather than a bit more cash in the bank for EU.
If the commission really has spine, it will seek this type of remedy rather than the easy way out. It may in fact seek a combination of fines and structural remedy, so we'll just have to wait and see.
Hey, they broke the law.. (Score:3, Insightful)
Something tells me that the fine was worth it to them, an 'acceptable loss' to hold on to the market.
The price of doing business (Score:5, Insightful)
They have $50 Billion dollars in cash. 1% of one's cash reserves (never mind revenues) is simply not a punishment.
Imagine being taxed one percent of your life savings for a license to break all the laws you like. That sounds like a pretty sweet deal to me.
The problem with fines is that business already thinks in terms of money. Punishments for breaking the law are intended to deter behaviour. Fines are instead framed by the company as just the cost of doing business.
What happens to the cash??!! (Score:5, Interesting)
This is where the real damage to MS could occur, if the penalty cash is dished out to the right FLOSS projects that threatens MS directly.
Proposed split based on what I think would help FLOSS and hurt MS:
50million for the Linux Kernel to get their security certifications finished for govt usage, driver improvements to the kernel, SE-Linux integration, whatever else Linus wants
50million for Apache Webserver, Tomcat, and other Apache-based projects that really eat into IIS market share
25million for OpenOffice with a focus on compatibility with MS Office.
25million for GNOME & KDE, split evenly on whatever they want, but with a preference on creating a Win2k-style desktop emulator so the riff-raff can change their screensavers like before
10million for plug-ins/features into Eclipse IDE that help emulate the best features of Visual Studio, and better integration of non-Java languages like Perl, PHP, C#/Mono, etc
10million on Bitkeeper replacement and/or Subversion to get great source code control mgmt, tied into Eclipse IDE enhancements above
10million on modeling tools for code or databases like SQL Navigator, or Rational Rose
10million for PHP on whatever they think they need
10million for Wine to get us closer to running lots of apps on non-MS Operating systems
10Million for ***BSD Flavors [Just because they have created so much with so little
10million for RMS and GNU with the promise he wont complain about everyone else's cash allotment
AND
25million for an investment fund that donates 50% of the yearly profits as grants to future promising FLOSS projects
Silence (Score:4, Insightful)
Puny Americans! (Score:5, Funny)
- Fine Microsoft scary amount of cash (just for show)
- Have Microsoft appeal in the most painstaking, bogged-down way imaginable
- Watch incredible amounts of $$$ flow into the European legal business and become EUR=> Profit
Do you now see the brilliance? All that cash being siphoned off from America's flourishing legal system, will be transferred directly to Europe. And the best thing is, Microsoft is doing all the dirty work for us!Re:At this rate.... (Score:5, Insightful)
It is one thing to aim for fairness, it is another thing to just be blinded by hate.
Comment removed (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Typical Europeans (Score:3, Funny)
Fine - they are unrealiable: we are keeping the Japanese cars tho.
> The jet engines from your aircraft (invented by Sir Frank Whittle in Britain in 1945)
You can have the prototypes the he never managed to get working - took the Germans to do that, and the US to perfect them.
> All your nuclear weapons and X-Ray machines (since radioactivity was discovered by the French Marie Curie in the 19th century)
Yeah she really did a bang up job with that, eh?
> The ideas t
Re:Typical Europeans (Score:3, Informative)
- The jet engines from your aircraft (invented by Sir Frank Whittle in Britain in 1945)
While I agree entirely, Whittle had a jet powered aircraft flying in the mid 1930s. And Germany had operational jet fighters and bombers in service in 1943/44. Just a minor nitpick :)
Re:Typical Europeans (Score:3, Interesting)
- All your BMW and Mercedes cars
- The jet engines from your aircraft (invented by Sir Frank Whittle in Britain in 1945)
You seem to be under the misguided impression that Britain actually enjoys being part of Europe.
Last time there was a poll on the matter (by The Sun), the majority of people in the UK wanted to be part of the US more than they wanted to be part of Europe.
No no, it should be... (oblig Austin powers ref) (Score:5, Funny)
EUC Number Two: "Uh huh hum. Well, don't you think we should maybe ask for more than five hundred million dollars? Five hundred million dollars isn't exactly a lot of money these days. The EUC alone makes over ninety billion dollars a year."
Mario Monti: "Really?"
EUC Number Two: "Uh huh!"
Mario Monti: "That's a lot. Okay then. We hold Microsoft ransom for..... five hundred BILLION dollars!!"
*Evil Laughter*
Re:Backtracking (Score:5, Insightful)
For being a monopoly. Or rather, using their monopoly position to leverage themselves against competitors.
Spending millions of dollars to develop IE which was then distributed free with Windows pushed Netscape out of the browser business fast.
Now they're trying to do the same with AIM, Real, iTunes, well, you name it!
Doing that kind of stuff is not legal in the USA, nor is it legal in any western country. And for good reason: Monopoly practices are bad for everybody except the monopolist.
It's damaging to the economy. It's damaging for consumers.
Or to put it another way: Capitalism is it's own worst enemy.
(and that was pretty much agreed upon until certain politicans realized that big businesses had bigger pockets for campaign spending)
Lets flesh this out (Score:3, Insightful)
In your normal business environment, people compete for your business. They advertise, market, and change prices in order to try to do better than their competitors.
The problem is a monopoly by definition has no competitors. Lets say you have a
You're missing the point (Score:5, Insightful)
It's not chump change. It's a small but significant dent, which they've unceremoniously been given in spite of Ballmer's best efforts to talk the authorities down last week.
It's also widely rumoured to be accompanied by (a) a compulsion to ship a version of Windows with Media Player completely stripped out, in order to remove the artificial dominance Microsoft has secured over the multimedia world, and (b) heavy penalty conditions if Microsoft gets up to this stuff again, so lengthy court action can be replaced by abruptly hitting them when they're down. These are, for now, only rumours, since the ruling won't be made public until later this week. However, no-one's jumping up and down denying them, and it's well known that all the European parties and Microsoft have seen that ruling. Draw any conclusions from that you like, or wait to see for sure mid-week.
At any rate, this isn't meant to kill Microsoft. It's meant to make them behave, and to reopen competition in the marketplace for the benefit of the public. In that respect, it seems fairly well judged, assuming the above rumours are reasonably accurate.