Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft's EU Appeal is Ready
psic writes "According to techworld, Microsoft plans on lodging its official appeal to the European Commission concerning the EC's decision to fine the software giant 497.2 million euros, as well as forcing them to open up part of the code of Windows, "so other products could interoperate with it better".
It's taken Microsoft a couple of months, but their appeal is ready. One interesting thing is the fact that an appeal will take at least three years to conclude. But the decision of the EC might just come into effect very soon, regardless of Microsoft's appeal."
Hmmm.
I dont know about you, but if someone tried to fine me 497.2 million i would be happy to wait three more years before paying.
Do you need a website upgrade?
3 years... sheesh, those administrators sure knows how to work effectively.
:-)
Isn't there a chance that the appeal will be summarily (sp?) turned down? I thought that an appeal for a new trial was only granted when there was new evidence available?
(I just submitted this like 1 minute before it was on the frontpage... sigh.. if only once I'd get a story accepted
Assuming 1) it takes three years for the appeal process to be completed, and 2) Microsoft will not pay the fine until they *lose* the appeal, will they also be liable for the interest on the money? Its not an insignificant amount...
--- We are not in the 8th dimension. We are over New Jersey.
From article: "Microsoft has expressed disappointment with the EU ruling."
In related news: Getting stabbed in the face hurts. For a while.
SIG: TAKE OFF EVERY 'CAPTAIN'!!
punishments can go up as well as down, its possible a judge can rule that the previous courts punishment wasn't harsh enough
Both Microsoft and Apple have a huge number of lawsuits to deal with this year (thats even affecting stock/futures), do you think the entire industry has legal problems or is it a trait specific to American companies ?
What happens if Microsoft loses its request to suspend the remedies, so is forced to pay the fine and open up parts of Window's and subsequently wins the apeal?
OK, the EU can repay the fine (with intrest) but once the code is open it stays open.
The lawyers who manipulate this system of constant appeals.
Evolution or ID?
it's a drop in the bucket compared to their $60 Billion in cash. It is just a simple "cost of doing business" for them. Not that I wouldn't be surprized if they rolled over on this without and appeal, but think about it.
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain
Not only that, but this can be good for Microsoft too in the long run because it will force them to compete. Even the best intentioned companies can put out rubbish when they don't have the gun of competition to their heads.
To the making of books there is no end, so let's get started
The original decision was a determination of the European Commission. This is part of the executive branch of the European Union, and you could see its rulings as equivalent to rulings of the Office of Fair Trading/ Competition Commission here in the UK, or the Department of Justice in the US. There is an automatic right of appeal from such decisions to the judicial branch (the European Court): this is seen as an essential part of the system of checks and balances in the EU. Strictly, the case is currently being appealed to the European Court of First Instance: there is a further layer of appeal to the European Court itself.
The three year gap between government making its mind up on the case it wishes to pursue and final determination of that case in the courts is not that different from what might be expected in the US I think, in a case involving this much money and complexity. The further appeal may stretch things out a little further but not necessarily as (a) the European Court tends to follow the decisions of the CFI and (b) the Court has the power to call the case before it immediately, leapfrogging the intermediate stage (I believe again this is a similarity with the US Supreme Court- Federal Courts relationship, on which the European judicial institutions are modelled).
Looking at the current stock price of 26.13 we calculate the number of outstranding shares at about 10,792,192,882.
The last dividend payment was 0.16 a share, which would come in a total of $1,726,750,861.08 , so they cut the dividend by a third for one quarter - big deal.
I guess what they really care about is having to open up their source, with all of the recent exploits, one can only imagine what will happen if the source is public knowledge (a whole new can of worms - ba da bing). It could be a public relations fiasco, especially if it comes to light that there are many exploits that are or should have been known by MS.
So, in 2007 they will produce a Windows XP without Media Player. But who will buy WinXP in 2007 ?
This is just the time for launching LongHorn ! (and it will be bundled with Duke Nukem Forever)
And in 2012 they will release a light-Longhorn version without ExtraDRMizedMediaPlayer. Oh wait, 2012 is the date they will launch Microsoft Windows Interface, a really cool new Desktop Manager for the Linux 4.0 kernel.
Tsss... 3 years in computer science is like thousand years of history...
Ploum.net.
Is there going to be anything to stop Microsoft associating media files with a little program that says something like: "You do not have Windows Media Player installed. Windows Media Player is required to view media. Click here to download Windows Media Player."?
Then all the normal users would still use WMP.
# cat
Damn, my RAM is full of llamas.
Its not an insignificant amount...
Actually it is more than you may think. Microsoft's $56b cash hoard is bigger than most investment funds in the world. Hence, they get the best rates, the best opportunities and the best return.
This AC is basically correct. Losing party pays used to be the rule until the new Civil Procedure Rules came into force in England and Wales in 2001(Scotland and Northern Ireland having separate legal systems).
Now, generally, the losing party pays BUT if you've been unreasonable (e.g. by refusing to settle a case, then winning, but by less than the amount you were offered to make a deal), the winner can now get stumped with the loser's legal costs (from the date the offer was made).
AFAIK and IANAL but I thought most Commonwealth countries had a system of losing party pays. US is somewhat different, I think.
This case is going to be different again though as it is brought by the European Commission, in the European Courts where national laws and court procedure are irrelevant.
A key figure at Microsoft was found guilty of Murder. The justice department realised that a prison sentence would limit his freedom of movement, so in a last minute deal arranged by Microsoft's lawyers they agreed that the murderer would not use bladed weapons or bullets to attack people.
I don't know why the argument about how this will harm Microsoft is getting any time at all. Surely that's the entire point of a large fine!
they were required to make a "new" version of Windows without the media player
That and a few other monopoly-related restrictions that Microsoft has implemented
As far as I can tell the whole appeal process is Microsoft's way of defending their Palladium (aka "secure computing") system from "competitors". If they are forced to support software that doesn't run as Microsoft bids then they can deny it from installing. Sure the technology will take several years before it actually comes out, but MS would prefer to have complete control over Windows.
If you are forced to use Windows Media player you are forced to play by their rules. If you can use another media player on your computer than it would depend if that vendor used the same code protection as MS -- which they know no sane vendor who isn't MS-friendly would support. They could use this to sell you all kinds of access just because they would control the media player market.
I can tell you one thing, if I was a monopoly and I had control over a platform this big, I'd be tempted to contain it the same way that Microsoft is trying to. I'm really hoping that the EC wins because Microsoft needs some real legal competition to keep their monopoly in line.
it a quote from southpark and its a defence that just doesnt make sense...
------
beware he who would deny you access to information, for in his mind he dreams himself your master
The way I see it, Microsoft should simply have to comply right away. Then, if they want to lodge an appeal claim, then they are perfectly entitled to do so. If they win, they get their fine back with interest, as well as compensation for any money lost due to the other rulings. Maybe, as they say, once their systems are openly documented they cannot simply be UN-documented if they are found to be innocent. Then again, if a jailed man is found to be innocent, his lost time can't just be given back. That's the way the law works, and it needs to be the same for everyone!