EU Fines Microsoft $613 Million, Officially 1186
Decaffeinated Jedi writes "As reported by CNN.com, the European Union has hit Microsoft with a record US$613 million fine after a five-year investigation, finding the company guilty of abusing the 'near-monopoly' of the Windows operating system. Microsoft has been given 90 days to make a European version of Windows available without a media player and 120 days to give programming codes to rivals in the server market to allow 'full interoperability' with desktops running Windows. Microsoft plans to appeal the decision." Other readers point to coverage at
the BBC, ZDNet, Reuters (here carried by Yahoo!), and abc.au.net.
Money? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:The Question is: How are they going to pay? (Score:5, Informative)
There is no question.
You get fined for speeding you don't get to choose to pay it using luncheon vouchers.
You pay cash and it goes to the EU's exchequer.
More filthy rich lawyers (Score:3, Informative)
Hopefully the EU will be able to make the ruling stick in the end. The fine may not be all that much to MS, but being forced to unbundle Media Player, etc could have quite an effect on their future strategies.
EU statement.. (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Unbelievable (Score:5, Informative)
No one, since it is explicitly stated that they are ordered to release API info, NOT source code.
UK Open Source Draft for Public Comment (Score:4, Informative)
I tried to post this article but for some reason it was rejected in favor a completely pointless article about firewire and video cameras!
Anyhow it is important and should have been accepted!
to briefly put it;
Anyone here interested in Open Source, and supporting it in UK
government should digest this document and send your support/comments/insight
heres the link [govtalk.gov.uk] with downloads and stuff.
Its an important document and those here interested should read it and post related comments/ suggestions to the email address on that page.
What they are seeking to do is support evaluate both Open Source and Proprietary solutions; whilst doing their utmost to avoid vendor lock-in ; as is the case with Microsoft bundling IE & WMP (etc) with windows.
The document is an Open Draft, that means that right now it is not set in stone, and liable for change. If anyone here reads it and thinks it should be changed in anyway I would advise letting them know.
The IHT was reporting (Score:4, Informative)
They said a judge had a forthcoming ruling on that issue. It seems quite possible to me the ruling would go in favor of the government, since it is quite clear that a remedy that begins in five years would be as good as no remedy at all-- it is quite easy to look at how quickly the tech market moves and how quickly MS has been able to take over previous previous tech markets once they start putting the veritcal-monopoly moves on, and argue that if the remedy waits for the end of the appeals process, it will be too late to do anything to help the competitors the remedy is meant to address.
Whether this has changed since then I do not know.
Re:Wait, "full interoperability"? (Score:4, Informative)
Here is the EU press release [eu.int], that should be more accurate than that various news agencies make up.
You fail it (Score:4, Informative)
I RTFA, and I didn't see: what happens if they don't comply, or comply 1/2 and it's found that it doesn't cut it?
And this will be a bigger story if/when the sanctions immediately apply, instead of being enjoined until the end of the appeals process. Could go either way, I guess; but the first wouldn't allow Microsoft to play a waiting game.
Outlook and Office interfaces are most important (Score:2, Informative)
It is critically important the such interface documentation be available to all, not just big server vendors or closed source vendors that can sign license agreements--open source cannot sign agreements! The most important compatibility is not talking to Windows clients at the network level, but at the user/application level, both for platforms that support windows users as a server or as alternative systems that must interoperate properly.
Compatibility as a windows platform is overrated
Re:Bashing an American Company (Score:3, Informative)
People choose Microsoft.... (Score:2, Informative)
However, I've converted people to Mozilla Firefox - once they see the popup blocking, tabbed browsing and the nice search engine selector. The problem is that lots of people don't see these things. There's no-one much in the mainstream media suggesting alternatives to users, so they keep on using IE/Office/WMP.
And that's crucial. The tech press can wow about Linux, OpenOffice and Mozilla all it likes. A lot of small businesses don't read the tech press, so keep on using the MS products.
Re:They will never pay (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Bashing an American Company (Score:2, Informative)
and they did bash european companies too...
here is the top 5
1 Microsoft Corp (USA) in 2004
497 ME
2 Hoffmann-La Roche AG (Switzerland) 2001
462 ME
3 BASF AG (Germany) 2001
296.16 ME
4 Lafarge (France) 2002
249.60 ME
5 Arjo Wiggins (international) 2001
184.27 ME
6 Nintendo (Japan) 2002
149.13 ME
Re:Bashing an American Company (Score:4, Informative)
http://www.guardian.co.uk/medicalscience/story/
In 2001 the same comission fined Hoffman-La Roche (Swiss) for 462m, and BASF (German) to the extent of 296m, for vitamin price fixing.
You may go back to your freedom fries now.
PS: One can only hope that an appeal will not be granted. It does not have to be, you know.
Re:Free as in "get out of my face" (Score:5, Informative)
Nonsense. I may be able to buy some sort of PC without Windows on it, but suppose, like most businesses, I have standardised on one supplier (like Dell). I go to their website. I pick my PC. Where is the Linux Desktop option? As for alternative media content. Downloading alternative players and installing them takes time and effort. This may not be much for an individual but for a company with 10,000 seats its time and money.
Until I can go to most major PC suppliers and get the option of alternative OSes and features pre-installed and configured for hardware there is no true competition.
But they'll need their own codecs (Score:2, Informative)
Any company that wants to compete will have to license and/or create media codecs for themselves.
There is obviously a lot of functionality available by default to any app developer in Windows.
Re:Wait, "full interoperability"? (Score:3, Informative)
Sure. Except there are two things.
- Increased costs don't translate to higher prices. Businesses don't just go "oh gee, our heating bill was $70 higher this month than we were expecting, better raise our prices by 0.03 cents per unit". Businesses sell at the price that will maximize the value of the price per unit times the number of consumers willing to buy at the current price per unit. Cost only comes in in that if that value winds up being less than the expected overall cost of producing the product over time, the product is discontinued. unless the company is Microsoft. [itworld.com]
- Such costs would be nearly incidental. Like I said, the increased support and overhead costs would be absolutely dwarfed by, say, the amount of money put into Windows Media Player with no expectation on return, or the amount of money put into the XBox with no expectation on return in the last week*. It probably would not even be as large a cost as, say, a $613M fine. I don't see anyone going "Paying $613M to the EU will result in higher costs for Microsoft, resulting in higher prices to consumers".
* Caveat: This may not be a fair statement. I'm sure MS firmly expects the XBox 5 to make a small profit.Now given, since Microsoft can set their own prices, it's quite likely MS would purposefully increase costs in the EU after this even if it lowers their demand to "punish" the EU, or so that they can whine "oh look, enforcing antitrust laws just leads to higher demand". But the fact such things are possible seems to me like an argument for MORE action against MS's monopoly, not less.
Doesn't matter (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Before you start bashing EU as anti-American (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Money? (Score:1, Informative)
After three years, those of us on "the other side of the pond" will finally realise that they're doing just fine, and also start using linux.
Oy.
Re:I hope.... (Score:1, Informative)
MSFT was in the $33-34 range in November 2000 (split adjusted). Through December 2000, they dropped to around $21 only to rebound to $32 in January, drop again, up again, etc.
NET RESULT? They are trading at $24.15 today. That's right Capt. Dumbass - $24.15 off of a base/high of $35 during GWB's tenure.
So much for your GWBBIGBUSINESSBASHING tirade.
As for RJR, funny that I find this article THIS WEEK relating to your wonderful government activities toward BIGTOBACCO:
>>Reuters
>>More tobacco funds go to state deficits, study says
>>Monday March 22, 4:03 pm ET
>>WASHINGTON, March 22 (Reuters) - U.S. states
>>that cashed in on a landmark $246 billion
>>settlement with tobacco companies plan to spend
>>more of the money to plug budget deficits in
>>2004 and less of it on health-related programs,
>>according to a government study released on
>>Monday.
Re:US Government not happy? (Score:4, Informative)
How dare the EU declare war on and infringe the human rights of a lovely corporation like MS who just happens to have made [opensecrets.org] substantial [opensecrets.org] contributions [opensecrets.org] to [opensecrets.org] Ms. Murray's campaign fund. (~$200000).
Re:Huh??? (Score:3, Informative)
IE/WMP etc are NOT free. you pay for windows, you pay for IE/WMP.
Re:I doubt it... (Score:5, Informative)
How far does "interoperability" extend? (Score:4, Informative)
Personally, I hope it extends all the way. Imagine the Wine team not only having access to the Windows source (They sort of do now due to the leak, but they can't do anything with it), but being given legal permission by the government to use it, with Microsoft's help!
So, can somebody clear up how far this extends?
Re:This doesn't make sense to me (Score:3, Informative)
Part of how they can strongarm the OEMs is that WMP and IE are bundled with with OS.
If they have to have an unbundled version of Windows, then OEMs can supply other software instead. Imagine being able to buy a PC that might run Windows, but not comes with Mozilla and WinAmp (or Opera & Realplayer or Quicktime), but doesn't even have WMP and IE anywhere near it to hijack the User settings.
Opening up their formats and interface hooks can also help stop them being anticompetitive, as having to keep up with people who use Microsoft platforms won't automatically require having to use one yourself.
Plus, if nothing else, it shows Microsoft that they can't get away with being anticompetitive and automatically assuming that they'll be supported by the government.
Re:Before you start bashing EU as anti-American (Score:3, Informative)
Yes, but he replied to the statement: "'ll still consider in Anti-American till they start coming down on European monopolists with as much fervor." Since Switzerland is European (although not EU) and not American, I think the poster you replied to gave a valid example. BTW, according to BBC [bbc.co.uk], the second highest fine so far (296m euros) was imposed on BASF, which is a German company and thus European as well as from the EU.
Re:Assuming MS Pays... (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Huh??? (Score:2, Informative)
Indeed MediaPlayer (and RealPlayer) are free - but the streaming servers for each are not (and the Real one runs on a Mac, so MS don't even get the server licence fee)
Something similar applies to IE - Netscape didn't live on its browser sales, but on its Server sales; and note that now the IE bundling is being used in reverse - IE6 will be the last version released for W2K or the Win9x range; if you want IE6.5 and beyond, you *must* upgrade your windows to XP or 2003. In a world where half the websites don't work properly (or at all) in FireFox, but you dare not use an *old* IE due to the security vunerabilities, how will you access your preferred sites without paying for the latest and greatest DRM enabled version of windows?
Re:I hope.... (Score:5, Informative)
If Windows was 30% of the market share, MS could add a media player and increase value, sure.
What they could *not* do is threaten to jack up prices on OEMs that include rival media players, because the OEMs would use one of the OSes that made up the other 70% of the market.
They didn't even get in trouble for just bundling. They got in trouble specifically for *illegally leveraging monopoly power.* This is something you cannot possibly do without a monopoly, so market share DOES matter.
Re:why WMP ? (Score:3, Informative)
That is a mighty list of formats, my friend. Can you take a look at this page [apple.com] and tell me you don't use even one of those formats?
QuickTime is not like WMP or Real. It is a media architecture. It is not a codec. Apple barely has any codecs to speak of that they themselves have made (Pixlet being one of the exceptions).
More meat for the grinder (Score:2, Informative)
AAC is QuickTime? (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Assuming MS Pays... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:How far does "interoperability" extend? (Score:3, Informative)
The press release explicitly states that MS must release the APIs but does not need to release the source code because it is not required for interoperability.
The press release [eu.int]