Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft To Be Fined E500M By European Union?

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."

7 of 1,029 comments (clear)

  1. Sigh.... by tempest303 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    When are governments going to get a clue? Screw fines - almost no amount of money you can take from them will really have an effect on their behavior or the market. What the EU ought to do is to tell MS that if they want to do future business in Europe, they need to make the Office file formats an EMCA standard, and that any patents they have on the formats must be licenesed royalty-free. That would create real change and competition in the market - let them compete on implementation, as it ought to be!

    1. Re:Sigh.... by Trurl's+Machine · · Score: 5, Insightful

      You advocate a government (or governments) dictating to a publicly held company how they should write their software?

      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" has a grain of truth in it. Unlike cars, there are no mandatory crash tests for software. And it shows.

  2. Re:Drop in the bucket by badasscat · · Score: 5, Insightful

    "This is a traffic ticket for Microsoft," said Thomas Vinje of Clifford Chance, who represents Microsoft critics.

    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.

  3. Re:Backtracking by k98sven · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Well, I keep hearing talks about Microsoft being a monopoly and needing to be punished. But, what I want to know is what are they actually being punished for.

    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)

  4. Re:Peering into my crystal ball... by JahToasted · · Score: 5, Insightful

    In the nuclear age, having the most powerful military in the world is like being the best boxer in a gunfight.

  5. The price of doing business by bitspotter · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Had the EU (such as it was) approached Microsoft ten or fiteen years ago, and said: "We'll let you engage in anti-competitve practices in operating sytems, office applications, web browsers, and media players all you like for a crisp half-billion dollars, payable on delivery", do you think they would have taken the deal?

    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.

  6. Re:Peering into my crystal ball... by Talence · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Kind of funny when people have a major discussion on history where they personalize the complicated actions of groups comprising millions of people into simple "us" and "you" terms. Even more amusing when both sides try to convince eachother that the other is wrong, even though they each cannot change the historical facts. Looking at those facts though, neither side is that innocent anyway.

    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?

    --
    I plan to plan / Dutch course in The Hague