Microsoft Set To Be Fined $2.4M a Day

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."

Bam!

[Anonymous Coward]

Bet you wish it was just another pie now, dontcha' Gates!

Just a question

[jdwest]

Would MS even feel a $2.4M/day pinch?

Re:Just a question

[leonmergen]

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

[honeypotslash]

Yes, that is ~876 mil per year. I don't even think Microsoft would be able to afford almost a billion a year very long.
--
Get your Free MacMini here [freepay.com]

Re:Just a question

[mordors9]

Not just that $1 B. If they continued to ignore it very long incurring the fines, it may make them subject to shareholder suits. With the additional legal costs from those, you could run into serious money.

Re:Just a question

[Doctor Faustus]

Couldn't giving up a competitive advantage also open them up to shareholder suits?

Re:Just a question

[deaddrunk]

What the EU has done is enforce its laws, the same laws the US government has and failed to enforce effectively. MS has brought this on themselves, they could have easily played by the rules and licensed their technology to others. Intel did this and last I heard they were still turning a pretty hefty profit and consumers have benefited because now we have 2 major competing players in this market.

Re:Just a question

[WebCrapper]

Well, considering the article mentions that the fine will be dackbated to Dec 15th, that would mean that if they waited this thing out and the EuroUnion decided to fine them, as of 25 Jan (last chance day), they would owe $100,800,000... Don't know about you, but I'd certainly feel that.

What hurts...

[fm6]

No offense, but I suspect you don't even have $100 million. By contrast, Microsoft is valued at $282 billion, with annual revenue of $40 billion. So the backdated fines amount to 0.25% of their annual income. The equivalent for someone with an average middle-class income (say $50K) is $125. Not enough to cover one speeding ticket.

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:Just a question

[hey!]

Sure. I bet they have an intern right now looking underneath the cushions in the executive boardroom.

Re:Just a question

[VitaminB52]

Would MS even feel a $2.4M/day pinch?

Yes

No, they won't feel it. With a multi-billion dollar / month cashflow (a major part of it being net profit) they are not going to feel a fee like this.
$2.4M/day = approx. $7.5M/month << monthly profit.

Re:Just a question

[BushCheney08]

$2.4M/day = approx. $7.5M/month

Hmmm...3 day months? If two of those days are weekends, then I'm moving to wherever you are!

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Re:Just a question

[PierceLabs]

Of course it will hurt. Microsoft is a publicly traded company. Investors aren't going to want to watch millions of dollar of revenue evaporate every day. Hell at $75million per month, if Microsoft wants to hinder competition they'd do better GIVING products away.

Re:Just a question

[Anonymous Coward]

MS has a multi-billion dollar / month cashflow? That's close but perhaps a slight exaggeration. Net income for quarter ending 30Sep2004 was $2.901 billon so that's about 1 billion a month in profits.
Report here. [microsoft.com]

On 2.4M/day in a month, thats 72M which is 7% of 1 billion. I think MS will definitely feel it. The shareholders are not going to let 7% of profits go to a fine.

So, like what a previous poster said, the main question will be is 7% of profits greater than the cost of opening up or not?

Re:Just a question

[Doctor Faustus]

Better question -- why would MS even care what the EU fines them?
Are you asking what gives the EU jurisdiction to collect on the fine?

Re:Just a question

[justins]

Are you asking what gives the EU jurisdiction to collect on the fine?

Hey, they were important once! Napoleon, Churchill, The Beatles, etc.

Re:Just a question

[GuyverDH]

No.

I think what he's stating, is that MS will just decide to STOP providing product and services to ANY EU country. At which point, MS believes that the EU will back down, cowering and repeating the mantra of "Sorry, so sorry" over and over again.

Re:Just a question

[ZeroExistenZ]

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 b

Re:Just a question

[Anonym0us Cow Herd]

I think what he's stating, is that MS will just decide to STOP providing product and services to ANY EU country.

Oh please God, let it happen in the US too!

Re:Just a question

[eyrieowl]

you can (try and fail to) argue that the EU is a wannabe government, but you'll come crashing down when all the EU governments of Europe which support the EU support the EU in fining Microsoft. The EU has had issues *politically* integrating Europe, but the European countries have been moving forward with economic integration since the days of the European Common Market...well before the EU. They would most certainly not look kindly at MS were it to try to thumb its nose at them and refuse to pay its fines. MS *does* have European assets that could be seized, and it would *very much* like to continue doing business on the continent.

Re:Same old EU whining

[Random832]

"your assets will be seized if you decide to operate outside the law" doesn't sound like rocket science - why would this put off other [presumably more law-abiding than microsoft] companies?

drop in the ocean

[Phil246]

Imo a fixed number for fines is all wrong. large companies can afford to pay it because actually playing by the rules is more expensive for them :/
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:drop in the ocean

[sehryan]

It only takes a year for this to turn into almost $1B. MS might have a lot of money sitting around, but I doubt it could let $2.4M dribble away like this. Especially when you consider that they are already taking another financial hit with making the 360.

876 million/ annual

[IAAP]

I agree completely. Then again, 2.4 million per day comes out to $876 million for the year. Even MS would feel that and it wouldn't do much for the stock price either. Even then, I'd like to see the EU collect. That would REALLY be interesting!

Re:drop in the ocean

[richie2000]

The Commission's fines are generally set with the size of the infringer's purse in mind.

Re:drop in the ocean

[nutshell42]

The fines are based on company income. I'm not sure whether it's global income or only the money earned in member states.

Do you really think the EU would fine joe sixPACK Inc. $2.4M *a* *day*

Debt collection

[ettlz]

Just how can the EU make Microsoft pay this?

Re:Debt collection

[gregarican]

They will send the case to some collection agency, who will call Bill Gates at home and at work asking when payment will be made or at least a reason why it hasn't been made yet. Then Bill will have no other alternative than to write the check to keep the monkeys off his back.

Re:Debt collection

[div_2n]

By kicking them out of their market. The EU is not a trivial sized market for MS. I do not think MS wants their software kicked out so Linux can take it over. That is just the sort of thing which would cause a monumental shift in the overall market.

Re:Debt collection

[nickco3]

Just how can the EU make Microsoft pay this?

The same way as all courts enforce payment. They will confiscate however much of the offender's property they can get their hands on, and possibly sling their asses in jail for contempt of court if they continue to refuse.

Re:Debt collection

[hal2814]

They send Dr. Diablo after him. [spotlightonfinance.com]

Re:Debt collection

[Chyeld]

To do business in the EU, just as you have to in the US, you have to have licenses, permits, etc. All of which require periodic renewal. If Microsoft simply said "See ya!" and let the fines rack up, they would not be allowed to renew those items. They would eventually no longer have the legal ability to do business in the EU. Then they would either have to settle (for a far smaller sum if history is any indicator) or pay up to be able to regain that privledge.

Also, since they have headquarters and subsidaries in the EU, those would be shut down when the licenses and permits expired.

Plus, if the EU really wanted to be mean, they could order seizures of Microsoft products being sold in EU stores.

Will any of this happen? Unlikely, but it works on paper.

Without the legal ability

Re:Debt collection

[Chyeld]

bleh, never put your hand down on the keyboard when looking over your shoulder to find out what a co-worker is laughing about.

What the last part of my comment was meant to include is that without the legal ability to do business in the EU, Microsoft loses access to a large market, it's dobutful they'll allow things to go that way. Especially since EU politicians are just as buyable as US or ME ones are, why bring things to a head when you can pad a few pockets and make it all go away?

I'm sorry, I'm confused again.

[llamalicious]

Is today pro-Microsoft or anti-Microsoft?
I left my cheat-sheet at home...

Re:I'm sorry, I'm confused again.

[BushCheney08]

Well, you know, everyone is feeling that giving spirit right about now. I guess this includes /.ers letting MS off the hook easily. Hint guys: posting positive comments about MS for the next few days doesn't increase the chances of there being a 360 under the tree...

Re:I'm sorry, I'm confused again.

[Golias]

Is today pro-Microsoft or anti-Microsoft?
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:I'm sorry, I'm confused again.

[Winterblink]

Not sure. Depends on how many 360s people found at Best Buy this morning.

Microsoft Picket Lines

[Mulletproof]

"Microsoft Set To Be Fined $2.4M a Day"

That's what those bastards get for shutting down New York with that transit strike.... Oh, wait...

Typical stalling tactics

[Recovering Hater]

And M$ will predictably wait until the last minute to provide documentation. I'm sure the documents that M$ provides will be bare minimum in scope just to get off the hook. Nothing to see here. Move along...

MS should disable Excel's Euro plug-in ...

[joelsanda]

and they could 'recalculate' the fine to be 2.4 dollars a day.

what's next?

[jaemz]

How long before we see the 'Microsoft disclosure documentation of non-Microsoft work group servers for dummies' book?

why?

[COMON$]

left with no alternative Who wants to be the first to start listing alternatives? So you purchase a software, you run it, and find that you screwed yourself over by becoming a MS junkie. So the only alternative is to fine the organization into submission?

This is about as asinine as suing an open source company for making their code public...

What information do they actually need?

[91degrees]

Is it file formats? Kernel interfaces? Network protocols? Or are we looking a lot more low level?

EU's Infrastructure...

[Anti-Trend]

...EU's rules. If Microsoft was to choose not to follow their stipulations and refuse to supply the documentation or retract their services from Europe altogether, in this tech's opinion the EU would be better off for the decision. Economically speaking, they could spend the money they were spending on Microsoft Licenses on their own internal development, keeping the cash in the area. Technologically, any *nix makes a better server than Windows and requires less administrative staff to accomplish the same t

If the shoe was on the other foot...

[OwlWhacker]

If Internet Explorer was locked-out, or it was made extremely difficult to operate with Apache, there would be an outcry.

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:The Difference

[OwlWhacker]

IF they were made by the same company, as you propose, nothing would be wrong

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.

What's with the pro-MS sentiment today?

[AlXtreme]

Is this pro-MS day or something? 'mericuns, stop seeing this as a US/EU war and look at the bigger picture.

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.

Europe

[MicroBerto]

From an outsider's point of view (I'm an American), Europe is quite a different beast than most other outsiders realize.

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.

May be impossible

[hacksoncode]

Microsoft may not be able to comply with this request without effectively releasing all their source code. I have thought for a long time that Windows is such an organic life form that no one really understands how it works, either inside or outside Microsoft.

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:Wait what!?

[Trip Ericson]

If Microsoft wants to operate in a particular market, they have to respect the laws and governments of that market, no matter what those laws may be.

Re:Wait what!?

[mumblestheclown]

I'm sure you're fully in support of search engines fully cooperating with despotic governments in order to filter free speech then, too?

Re:Wait what!?

[Trip Ericson]

No. I'm not. I'm opposed to Y! and Google operating in China at all. Because when they do, they have to follow the laws of China.

Re:Wait what!?

[AlienGoods]

While I agree with your sentiment, having lived in Europe for over a year, I think things are a little too regulated in most countries. This has now extended to international business, and it will come back to bite you in the butt. Already, sentiment in the US against EU regulators is growing. It has been since the GE/Honeywell deal fell through due to EU interference (read - protecting Airbus and their other golden boys). Now you have the whole "lipstick debacle". MS doesn't have to look far when they want

Re:Wait what!?

[Viol8]

"read - protecting Airbus and their other golden boys"

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:Wait what!?

[nickco3]

Down the line I see the EU using regulation to hurt US businesses, and the US doing the same in retaliation. This is only going to lead to a pissing contest where everyone loses.

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 return

Re:Wait what!?

[williamhb]

wasn't microsoft operating in europe before the "EU"?

Before the Treaty of Rome, 25 March 1957... um, no.

Re:Wait what!?

[pmjordan]

People were downloading music from Napster before DMCA and equivalent copyright law amendments. Your point is what? The law changes, for better or for worse, depending on your point of view. Besides, each of the EU member states had their own anti-trust laws before joining, it just takes the responsibility off each individual country to enforce them, which makes sense for a common trade area.

~phil

Re:Wait what!?

[Pxtl]

Microsoft has been repeatedly proven to be an antitrust violator, in numerous jurisdictions. Once you're found to be abusing a monopoly position, you're pretty well fscked. Just because the USA wussed out of actually punishing them after the conviction doesn't mean that other countries have to.

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?

Re:Wait what!?

[Tx]

Can they by law do that?

They are the law. (to paraphrase Judge Dredd)

Re:What will they do?

[Golias]

I wonder how they will wrangle their way out of this one?

Easy. Don't pay it.

Re:What will they do?

[peragrin]

Why should they.

MSFT can simply pay the fine daily. it's only $880 million a year. They lose that much in lawsuits annually anyway.

Go MSFT give the judge the finger and tell them instead of opening up your just gonna pay the fine. It will be fun.

Re:Just dumb

[Androclese]

Here's a better question...


Just because they send a bill to Redmond, do they really think it will get paid?

I'm not being a M$ lacky here, I'm really wondering how a foreign power can enforce that?

Re:Just dumb

[richie2000]

I'm really wondering how a foreign power can enforce that?

Because Microsoft has large offices in all European countries, subsidiaries with thousands of employees that pay taxes in those countries. The Union could go after those, or simply impose a 120000% import tax on all Microsoft software. Or invade Redmond with the French Foreign Legion. There are ways.

Re:Just dumb

[richie2000]

Microsoft never said (that I know of) that they were required to use Windows.

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

[bobintetley]

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:Just dumb

[bobintetley]

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.

Hey now...

[Belial6]

I don't read Slashdot to hear people admitting their own faults, and getting along. Stop it! Get back to misunderastanding, and calling each other names!

Re:Just dumb

[MaestroSartori]

Microsoft never said (that I know of) that they were required to use Windows.

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:Just dumb

[Aceticon]

It's called consumer protection, maybe you've heard of it?

On this side of the pond we're very big on trying to protect consumers from extorsionist behaviour by companies in monopoly positions, busting cartels, punishing companies that lie to their customers, avoiding overuse of shared resources (for example the environment), that kind of thing.

No worries though - i believe we are moving in the direction of the american model of "voluntary" industry regulations and corporate buying of legislation.

Re:Just dumb

[erroneus]

Consider this:

Microsoft with its illegal monopoly abuse practices seems to think it can ignore the problem away like a bad dream. The EU has its own monopoly over who can do business in the EU. They have every right to do what they are doing as they were voted (I assume) into office by the people. And let's face it -- with Microsoft refusing to comply, it is going to have to come to a head where one side or the other will have to push their hand. If you ask me, this is what I'd do (not that they will):

I

Re:The trick

[grazzy]

How is this modded flamebait? It so very true. This is just a demonstration of power from EU that will just benefit the industry and bureucrats, not the people of europe.

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 ...

Re:The trick

[Zebadias]

Monkeys yes, users not a chance!

WOW, I got a 130 IQ or higher

[SmallFurryCreature]

Nice, kinda of odd I flunked out of school then. For your information, an IQ of 130 or higher puts you at the high end of the human race. Only a few percent score that high.

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.

IQ and school performance

[Pac]

IQ does not correlate perfectly with IQ performance, specially at the high end of the curve.

And you're kidding right? The only time early UNIX machines were approached by people with IQs bellow 140 was when they were being transported from one place to another, and that's only when those people were idly standing near the truck - other than that even the truck drivers and the janitors who cleaned the rooms they were stored in held at least one PHD.

Re:WOW, I got a 130 IQ or higher

[mdielmann]

Any person with a IQ above room temperature will get the hint.

I don't know about you, but I keep the room temperature between 18 and 22 degrees Celsius. People with IQs that low barely know how to breathe. Of course, that hovers around the 295 Kelvin mark, but do you know how hard it is to find someone with an IQ approaching 200, let alone 300? Now I don't know about any other useful temperature units...except for some arbitrary system with no simple correlation between different units (even ones for measuring the same things!) and goofy names like furlong, inch, stone, grain, and Fahrenheit.

Re:WOW, I got a 130 IQ or higher

[Lispy]

Yup. I am myself sometimes amazed by the laziness some people get away with. Basically 25% of my job as tech support consists of reading manuals for devices I know nothing of. The funny thing is, I usually figure it out pretty fast once I read it. The fact that I have to read it for lazy bumps that call techsupport because they don't want to read it themselves pretty much sucks, though: "NO! I haven't dealt with that X345R device either! I am not even smarter than you. I simply read the manual wich you refu

Re:The trick

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

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 no

Re:The trick

[carlislematthew]

Two points:

1) People don't like to "dabble" very much. They want to just be able to use it. Some may argue that our history/education with Windows is what gives that OS the edge when it comes to usability (compared to Linux), but I would argue that it's just plain easier to use than Linux. Linux is not even in the same league as Windows or OSX when it comes to regular users doing normal things on their computers.

2) People don't want to learn an OS or customize it to make it work for them. They don't

Re:The trick

[IAmTheDave]

It's all in the math. MS profits are around $2B/quarter on $9.xB in revenue (reference [alwayson-network.com]). That's $8B in profit on top of a war chest of what is it now - $50B? So instead of $8B/year in profits, it's $7.8B. Although, profits are up year over year despite sluggish sales growth, so assume a moderate $.5B profit rise next year, which basically wipes out this fine.

Add to that the fact that MS will either appeal/have overturned/comply and wipe out the fine anyway... Pooooooor Microsoft.

Re:The trick

[fermion]

MS does not take it toys and go home because MS is part of the free market, and as such needs customers to purchase its products and services. More importantly, it needs an expanding base of customers to drive bussiness growth. The video game market will only do so much, and given the dismal sales outside of the US, MS really needs to be kissing the but of Europe right now.

In fact, this is a turn point. Linux might be harder to install, and in some cases use, but Europe and Asia has a bunch of cheap ta

Re:this is stupid

[puke76]

I'm not sure Microsoft's shareholders would share your sentiment. I'd like to see the market reaction to that announcement: "Our customer base is now halved."

Re:this is stupid

[aug24]

I wouldn't be surprised if even more than half of MS's paying customers were in the EU.

I often get the impression that the yanks on this site think they outnumber the limeys by a huge factor. In fact there's only about five times as many (300 million to to 60 million).

Now add in Germany, Turkey, France, Italy, Spain, Poland, The Netherlands, Greece, Portugal, Belgium, Hungary and a few more to get the EU, and you're up to about half a billion. That's half as big again as the US, and could easily scale

Re:this is stupid

[IANAAC]

If i was microsoft i would say "ok...well see you later Europe."

Do you know how big the EU market actually is? Add the fact that it's a single trade zone.

That's pretty attractive for any business, public or private.

Re:this is stupid

[gad_zuki!]

>"ok...well see you later Europe."

Of course you would. This would be following:

Security... well see you later!

Interoperability... well see you later!

Open standards... well see you later!

Competitive prices... well see you later!

Eventually all this will (if it hasnt already) bite them serverly in the ass. Losing the Europe market isn't an option. Its huge. The stockholders would get management replaced if they pulled a stunt like that. Not to mention the EU is right and is doing what America is unable or unwilling to do herself.

Re:this is stupid

[CAPSLOCK2000]

They can't leave Europe. Not selling Windows to Europe could lead to two possible scenario's, and both are bad for MS.
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 migh

Re:this is stupid

[VitaminB52]

I'm not pro-microsoft in everything...but this is just stupid.

If i was microsoft i would say "ok...well see you later Europe."

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:this is stupid

[richlv]

if you were ms, i would tell you
"oh, please, please do not, our economies will crush, we will beg you to come back and have govt agreements with you later - please don't leave us !"

Re:exactly.. they should pull windows

[OwlWhacker]

Europe is much more heavily dependent on windows than the US

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:MOD PARENT UP!

[Z0mb1eman]

Why? Grandparent post should be marked as flamebait, if anything... I'll bite.

>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.

Re:Europe ain't all that

[gormanly]

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:Complaints, anyone

[BushCheney08]

That's it. I'm moving all my servers to Samba.

Where's Samba? Is that like Sealand?

Re:End of proprietary code?

[richie2000]

If the market wants MS to open up, the market should decide it.

The market does want that, but when there's an 800lbs gorilla in the market, the market no longer works as intended. That's what being a monopoly is all about - shutting down the forces that makes a free market work. Something needs to negate that influence to jump-start an active and free market again. In this case, the European Commission is doing that.

Re:End of proprietary code?

[pmjordan]

You, just as plenty of other posters in this thread, seem to be forgetting a couple of facts:
- 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

I'll explain

[jjustus]

why the EU has this kind of power over Microsoft? I thought that Microsoft is a U.S. based company that must obey U.S. laws.

Of course you have to obey the laws of the country you do business in. Let's say a hypothetical company in Fuckmenistan is allowed to kidnap and murder their competitors at will, according to Fuckmenistan's laws. Now are you saying that they should be able to do this in the U.S. too, because they are a "Fuckmenistan based company"?

A downside where it's even easier to create

Re:bad ruling.

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

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?

Wow, where to begin. MS is one legal entity called a corporation, not two individuals. This is a lot more like restricting a child molester out on parole from going near playgrounds. MS has illegally used their monopoly multiple times. Now the courts have forbidden them from activities that could lead them to abuse it again. It sounds pretty reasonable to me. If MS wants their server and other operations legally separate they can just make them separate corporations. I'm all for splitting up MS and letting them actually compete.

As to the source code, you're mistaking EU ruling. They order them to open up the protocols and make them interoperable, not to open the source code. That is like saying they have to open up the .doc spec after abusing their monopoly to make .doc the default specification. It is not like saying they have to open up the source to Word. The only issue is MS won't release the spec, and what they have released is not what they are actually using. After so many times of them lying and giving a spec that is not the real spec, access to the source code may be the only way anyone can determine what the real spec is.

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.

Where do you get this crap? Opening an API is not open sourcing the code that implements an API. It is documenting what is used and making sure others can use it equally. It is akin to one company having a monopoly on cars, and then switching all their cars to use a non-standard fuel. The courts just said they have to tell everyone what the specifications for the fuel are (not even the formula for it or the process used to make it) so that they can't use that monopoly to take over the fuel market. I hope you are being paid to spread this FUD. If MS does not want to be punished they shouldn't break the bloody law.

This is an attempt to throw a bone at competitors of Microsoft...

This is an attempt to stop MS from illegally putting more people, with better products, and who actually innovate, out of business.

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.

No, the fact that MS is gaining market share with such an obviously inferior product is what prompted this response.

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.

I doubt it, or they would be picking on a lot more corporations. Nope this is about power, and making sure foreign companies don't put local ones out of business by breaking the laws.

MS chose to break the law as part of their business model. They have a gajillion lawyers and know full well when they are breaking the law. They have just gambled that it will be more profitable to break the law and pay any fines and settlements that result than it will be to comply with the law. So far they have been completely correct in this gamble and it has paid off amazingly well. Even with a few million dollars a day in fines they will still be making money in Europe, thus further justifying their business plan. This tells corporations around the world something most of them already know. Laws are an inconvenience for corporations, not a deal breaker. Crime pays, especially when it is on a very large scale that allows you to bribe corrupt politicians left and right. Additionally, you can get sympathy from uneducated, ignorant, nationalists who are willing to support breaking crimes in other countries. Brilliant!

Re:This is why I am not in favour of the EU

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

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:EU should RTFM

[Alioth]

This is an antitrust issue. Your whole EXACT SAME issues thing is a non-sequitor because:

- 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.

Re:EU should RTFM-American decisions

[Alioth]

They were *also* convicted in the European Union. The EU isn't fining Microsoft because they violated US law; they are fining Microsoft because they were violating *European* law.

Re:EU should RTFM-American decisions

[Keeper]

The EU ruling was absolute utter bullshit. Microsoft "violated" EU law by including a media player -- a standard feature in Windows since Windows 3.1. The argument was that this was strongarming Real out of the market.

Yes, the EU posterchild victim is Real. The company who produces tries to make it as hard as possible to find the free version of the player on their website. The company bundling masses of spyware in their free product. The company whos product takes over playing all of your file extensi