New Antitrust Complaint Filed Against Microsoft

jimboid and others wrote in about a new antitrust complaint filed against Microsoft in the European Union, concerning Windows XP (all previous litigation has concerned earlier versions of Windows). The BBC and Sydney Morning Herald have articles about the complaint.

Comments

More interesting quote by the CCIA

[James_Duncan8181]

"The forms of Microsoft's abusive conduct are often closely interrelated, and their market foreclosure effects in many instances reinforce each other. The effectiveness of Microsoft's anti-competitive behaviours in preserving Microsoft's existing desktop dominance and in leveraging that dominance into related markets can only truly be understood if these behaviours and their exclusionary impact are viewed as a whole, rather than examined in isolation from each other."

Is it just me or do these guys appear to be the first legal agressors against Micorsoft to understand the real issue?

Re:More interesting quote by the CCIA

[Anonymous Coward]

I think most people understood it, but its hard to argue in court that their general attitude is anti-competitive. Instead, you need to deal with specific cases, such as a particular action (perhaps detailed by an internal email) designed to have a specific effect.

Many people would not disagree that BillG is 'evil' in some sense. But converting that into an argument that would hold up in a court of law (ie. criminal) requires specific allegations,and each allegation, by itself, is not particularly serious.

Re:More interesting quote by the CCIA

[James_Duncan8181]

The point about the EU investigation is that it is instructed to take an overall view. A investigation by an EU Commissioner is not like a DA considering whether to make charges - Mario Monti is judge, jury, and exicutioner. If he feels that fines are neccisary then he can levy them. And it is important to note that these are not pissant fines - they can be up to 10% of revenue made during the period over which they are held to be infining (also defined by the Commisioner).

I know, I know, insert declaimation of dictatorship here. ;)

Re:More interesting quote by the CCIA

[glamslam]

"Is it just me or do these guys appear to be the first legal agressors against Micorsoft to understand the real issue?"

Of course people here (in the US) will say its really just anti-American retaliation for the steel tariffs.

antitrust suits

[odyrithm]

How long can this go on for? you cant keep pulling the same company for antitrust violations.. wasnt Microsoft supposed to be split up? what ever happened there? this is just going to carry on and on and on.. its getting pretty frustrating really.

Re:antitrust suits

[jonathan_ingram]

Imagine the fun if foreign courts enforced laws in distant lands.

Such as having a Russian arrested for breaking, while in Russia, a US law?

Or a Norwegian arrested for putatively breaking, while in Norway, a US law?

Re:antitrust suits

[Saint Fnordius]

The EU was waiting to see if the US courts were going to spank Microsoft first. Since the result isn't satisfactory for the EU, the EU will start taking matters into their own hands.

Granted, this will at first only affect customers in the EU, but that a big market. Microsoft can't just soak up the punishment without shareholders revolting. And caving in to the EU means that customers elsewhere will want the same benefits. Microsoft will then see themselves pressured to meet their demands or fork their development.

The wheels of justice are slow, but we're all so used to instant results that it gets frustrating too soon. Sometimes it pays to be patient and persistant.

Re:antitrust suits

[capt.Hij]

How long can this go on for?

It can go on for a very long time. This is what happened to IBM. When they got huge and started pushing the markets around, governments were hitting them from all sides. Between the constant nit-picking and their own lethargy, they eventually lost their market share.

It seems that history is repeating itself. MS is trying to get involved in everything under the sun [sic] and governments have their sights set on them. MS will eventually lose focus as it worries about revenue from the x-box, personal PC's, cell phones, internet ready refrigerators, and maybe even operating systems and software. At the same time, governments are looking for ways to reduce the power of this growing company.

Re:antitrust suits

[HiThere]

From my really brief perusal of the article it looks like this is a new complaint about additional violations. That they are being merged into the same case, if they are, strikes me as a procedural issue. And if they continue to commit new crimes, isn't it proper that new charges be filed?

I don't see any injustice here. Perhaps the potential for injustice, but the recent history of US courts doesn't make me feel that we are in any position to carp. Consider the Rico acts, where they sieze your property upon your being accused. This prevents you from being able to hire a lawyer. It is also acting on a presumption of guilt. And somehow much of the property never returns to the original owner, even if the charges are defeated. Sorry. The last time Europe had laws that corrupt (to my knowledge) was during the inquisition. We've even revived holding people without access to a lawyer or knowledge of the charges against them. Yes, it's blatantly unconstitutional, but that doesn't seem to be stopping them. So I don't see any room for complaint about Europe having a few procedural differences.

P.S.: You think the US has evolved away from railroading? Only if you are politically powerful. Look over the court decisions of the last few decades. The direction is the other way.

Ah, this one has teeth!

[AntiFreeze]

Quoth the BBC article:

The CCIA counts Oracle, Sun Microsystems, Yahoo and Nokia among its members.

The organisation said it had filed the new complaint in order to fight for customers.

"Microsoft's overwhelming dominance and its abuse of that dominance reaches into every corner of Europe and harms virtually every business and consumer who uses a computer," the association said.

This organization consists of companies who _know_ what they're talking about when it comes to computers and competition (and anti-competitive tactics, for that matter), and are taking up the fight from the _consumers'_ point of view. I think it is this twist which might lead to actual rulings which will stop Microsoft's hard-edged and illegal tactics.

Remember, Microsoft has had _two_ separate antitrust ruling against it (i.e. has been found guilty not once, but twice), but neither has had the bite to make any noticable differences in the way Microsoft has acted. Both suits really focused upon MS's anti-competitive methods, and not enough focus on what MS was doing to the consumers. This angle might just be what is needed.

Of course, since this is an EU case, who knows how a ruling with teeth might affect Microsoft - it would certainly affect them overseas, but here in America a difference might not be noticable.

Re:Ah, this one has teeth!

[bwalling]

This organization consists of companies who _know_ what they're talking about when it comes to computers and competition (and anti-competitive tactics, for that matter), and are taking up the fight from the _consumers'_ point of view.

Do not kid yourself. They are taking up the fight for the purpose of helping themselves. They do not care about the consumer. That just helps their argument. The whole point is so that they can make some more of the money that Microsoft is making.

That being said, I hope they win, because they do happen to be right.

Not Sure I agree..." judicial effectiveness "

[N8F8]

I'd sure hate to be the defendant in a case where the prosecutor or legislature could trump up or morph the charges whenever they want. The solution otthe US's problem is forcing a faster process (as is now being done in some federal criminal courts), not making it unreasonable to defend yourself.

Extraordinary array (6)

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft bundles an extraordinary array of products with Windows XP.
They include:
- Internet Explorer (browser);
- MSN Explorer (browser);
- Windows Media Player (media player);
- Windows Messenger (instant messaging client);
- Outlook Express (e-mail client); and
- Windows Movie Maker (video editor).

Wouldn't most people these days consider these things fairly standard applications that should come with an OS.
I know I would hate to have to pay for an OS, and then buy a browser, media player, email client, video editor, messenger. And I guess also paint, notepad, calculator, etc.

If they aren't, then why do most linux distros have all those things included in the standard desktop install...

Re:Extraordinary array (6)

[Diabolical]

The main problem with the array of products MS incorporates in XP is that competitors do not stand a chance trying to sell their products. Basicly because everything seems to be connected to each other and installing a competitors product could, and would, break something. The fact that MS bundles this software with it's operating system is what is considered anti-competitive and more importantly leveraging this bundle with it's dominant OS position and thus gaining an unfair advantage to which competitors have to fight.

I.e. the products do not gain their market dominance because of their own merits but because it comes with another product which has almost 100% market share.

As for your remark about linux: If you do not like the browser, media player or any other software package coming with your distro you can remove it and install something you do like without having to fear you would break something else. Furthermore, if you do not want any of these tools at all just roll your own linux distro. Try that with Windows......

So what

[Frequanaut]

The downfall of Microsoft isn't going to be caused by litigation.

It will be caused by offering an equal or superior product at a better or equal price.

Linux will be that product. It's not there yet, but it's inevitable that it will be at some point in the future.

Just as open source software will eliminate commercial software development as we know it today.

Re:poll...

[Col. Klink (retired)]

Followup poll:

How many are saying the same, but browsing from something other than IE while masquerading their user-agent as MSIE so they don't get locked out of various web sites?

Re:poll...

[GooberToo]

You mean you think it's ironic that people would be using the software that they hate that's more or less been forced on them? Especially if they are currently at work?

Wow...

Re:UK switching to Linux

[ichimunki]

Ever notice how many MS apologists have such high UIDs on Slashdot? Sometimes I wonder if these people are actual employees at Microsoft or just temps. Or maybe you're just way too invested in Microsoft products and you find Linux scary and you hope no one actually adopts Linux in larger settings because that would reduce your pointy-clicky Windows skills to complete uselessness.

The poster wasn't trying to tell you what to run on your machine (even if you somehow represent the UK government). He or she was hoping the UK government would decide to use Linux as a general purpose OS. As for you specifically, any "telling" would seem to have been more a case of making you aware of your options in hopes of making your life better, rather than some sort of force being applied. In the case of the UK government, apparently the poster believes that Linux fills their needs (probably for a general use OS) better than MS Windows does.

Apparently he or she also believes that the more people that use Linux, the more likely people will spend money improving various aspects of the OS or the applications that run on the OS. This seems like a reasonable assumption, since it seems helpful to a software project to have a large base of possible contributors of both money and code. Therefore, the more people who use Linux, the better Linux' chances of overall improvement.