EU Finds Microsoft Guilty Of Abusing Monopoly

cabalamat2 writes "The European Commission's draft report on Microsoft says they are guilty of abusing their monopoly position. The ruling proposes that Microsoft be fined; the amount of the fine will be decided in March or April, and the maximum fine permitted is 10% of Microsoft's global turnover, about $3.2bn. Microsoft are allowed to appeal against any judgement that goes against them, to the Court of First Instance, and it's expected they will do so, to drag out the process as long as possible."

Comments

So

[wizarddc]

If they appeal, and lose, do they also have to pay interest on their fine? They were found guilty of abusing this power now, so if they drag it out 3-5 years, do they have to pay back interest on that 3.2 billion? Wouldn't that be a deterent for the long, dragged out cases? If they have to pay a few years of coupounded interest, they might not be so lawyer happy.

Re:But monopolies that encourage slavery are ok

[PainKilleR-CE]

The things which is forbidden is not to have a monopoly and do things to keep it, but to use it in an unfair way to gain over competitors in other markets.

I'm not sure what EU law is on the matter, but US law states that it is illegal to do certain things to maintain a monopoly, and, in fact, these were the easiest things to prove against Microsoft in it's antitrust case (and most of those which they were found guilty of have supposedly been remedied, or at least are remedied if Microsoft does what they were told to do by the court).

It's not just about pushing your way into other markets, but also about preventing people from entering your market. This is why Apple was ruled out as a competitor in the OS market, because the hardware platforms are themselves a barrier preventing consumers from switching from an MS OS to an Apple OS (of course, this completely ignores the fact that many (if not most) consumers simply buy a new computer instead of upgrading, but I'm not the one that made the ruling).

DeBeers has done quite a bit to prevent other people from entering the diamond market, including threatening to flood the market if someone else enters, thereby reducing the price of diamonds and (hopefully from DeBeers' standpoint) make the market unprofitable for others. Once the other company goes out of business, supplies get choked off again and the prices gradually return to previous levels.