Microsoft Fails to Comply With EU Requirements

sebFlyte writes "ZDNet is reporting the news that the EU has rejected Microsoft's attempt to wriggle out of it's legal obligation to open up Windows protocols. Microsoft was attempting to bypass the regulation by offering a license totally incompatible with the GPL and which has an absurdly high fee attached. If Microsoft don't come up with a solution that the EU finds acceptable, then they can be fined $5m a day. They've also got some commentary on why Microsoft's behaviour cannot be allowed to stand." The BBC has commentary as well.

Comments

Like Larry Flynt

[suso]

$5 million a day? Big deal. Remember in the People vs Larry Flynt how the court fined him $10,000 a day until he complied with their request. $5 million a day is something like 1.8 billion a year. Somehow I think Microsoft would pay that just so that they can remain in control. From their point of view, the value of keeping their protocols closed is worth more than $1.8 billion a year. After all, they have enough cash in the bank to pay that fine for the next
15 years.

The EU would have to charge them $50 million a day before they'd really
care.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Anonymous Coward]

Yes, and after 15 years the company will be bankrupted as a result of fighting a war of ideology. Somehow I think that the shareholders would be ... upset ... by that outcome.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Xner]

They can impose fines up to a certain percentage of gross. I have a feeling they still have some wiggle room to increase them if MS decides to play the "pay and carry on as usual" game.

The EU is slow and undecisive, but like all huge burocratic institutions, once it gets moving it has a certain inertia.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[MyLongNickName]

I'm not sure what universe you live in, but $1.8 billion dollars per year is a lot of money. Even to Microsoft. This amounts to 20% of their profits.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[tehshen]

In the article, it says they already made $100 million a day. So even though losing half that would be pretty serious, they could still keep themselves up for a while.

It's useless to attack a large corporation such as Microsoft with fines and taking away money, because it doesn't work. Instead, take away things that they need to stay in power, such as forcing them to open their protocols, or greater interoperability. But not money.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Xner]

It's useless to attack a large corporation such as Microsoft with fines and taking away money, because it doesn't work. Instead, take away things that they need to stay in power, such as forcing them to open their protocols, or greater interoperability. But not money.

That's the entire idea behind the ruling, as spelled out in the blurb (not even the article!). You just need a big stick when you tell them "open your protocols OR ELSE!". The multimillion dollar/day fines are the "or else".

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[0x461FAB0BD7D2]

Wouldn't that be totalitarian if they just forced them to do things?

All Microsoft would have to do then is pull their products from Europe, and the EU would have a lot of problems from companies and consumers alike.

Fining a company is ok, however, because that is how a lot of crime is dealt with. This way, they make Microsoft look like the bad guy.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[MyLongNickName]

1) I did not read the article. But I think they may earn $100 million in revenue. NOT profit. This would cut into their profit margin by 20%.

2) Fines have to be implemented. You say take away things that they need to stay in power, such as forcing them to open their protocols, or greater interoperability. But if Microsoft fails to comply? What are you going to do? Whine and pout? You have to fine them. And if that fails, prevent them from selling in your member countries.

3) Ultimately it is money that a corporation is interested in, and SHOULD be interested in. It is up to gov't to create a system that makes that interest for money compatable with the wishes of society.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[suso]

I'm not sure what universe you live in, but $1.8 billion dollars per year is a lot of money.

Of course I know thats a lot of money. For me and you it is. But from Microsoft's point of view, it might be a fair trade off. Especially given their previous tactics.

In all likelyhood, they probably will comply with the EU's regulations in some way or another.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[MyLongNickName]

I am a free market guy. I also understand the limitations of free market. Occasionally, it is necessary for gov'y to step in to ensure that the profit motives of corporations do not step on the wished of society (labor laws, international restrictions on export, import). This is not bad. It is only bad when it becomes so restrictive that markets become inefficient to the point of not beefitting society as a whole.

The U.S. tends to be so Free Market that corps step on the little guy. Europe tends to be so restrictive that they have double digit unemployment in their largest countries. At some point, someone will realize there is a blance between the two.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[MyLongNickName]

And at some point, I will realize there is a preview button so I can stop my typographical errors.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Faw]

The article didn't said $5 million it said "5 percent of their global turnover".

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Marc Desrochers]

How do they get to remain in control? If they are being fined for soemthing it's obviously illegal, and could never claim control. Is a fine a license to break the law now?

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Artifakt]

Blance - it's simple, it's crisp. I like it. We should use that word for something.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[mpe]

$5 million a day? Big deal. Remember in the People vs Larry Flynt how the court fined him $10,000 a day until he complied with their request. $5 million a day is something like 1.8 billion a year.

One thing to remember is that the fine is most likely in Euros. If current trends continue it will end up costing Microsoft rather more.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Carewolf]

The unemployment problems in France and Germany are due to internal inflexibility and has nothing to do the with European model in general. The Scandinavian countries which has some of the most meddling politics has much lower unemployment rates (4-5% in Denmarks for instance).

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Dutch_Cap]

It also said they make $100 million every day. You do the math.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Foofoobar]

No no no no no...

You just need to turn to the CEO and CIO and say 'If you don't comply, we will nail your testicles to a board!'

Then they'll just hire someone like Bob Flannigan to head up the company.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[mOdQuArK!]

All Microsoft would have to do then is pull their products from Europe, and the EU would have a lot of problems from companies and consumers alike.

If Microsoft did something that drastic, the EU could simply declare ALL of Microsoft's products in the public domain. I'm sure a lot of 3rd party EU support vendors would be quite happy to provide support for EU companies who depend on Microsoft software.

Unlike companies which sell real physical products, companies which depend on "intellectual property" as a product will live or die by the legal framework supporting such property definitions. Such companies must not, under no circumstances, truly piss off the legislators, or they will find that their business model is fundamentally irrelevant to society.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[NoOneInParticular]

Doesn't work that way. If Microsoft would be foolish enough to pay the 5M a day and show that they're not amending their ways, next month the court will make it 10M, then 20M, then it will start seizing assets, and a whole string of unpleasentness will occur for the company. Effectively they'll be kicked out of the EU and that means that their monopoly will slowly crumble, as international companies dealing with the EU are forced to look for alternatives than Microsoft.

Microsoft will comply, no doubt about that.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[MysteriousPreacher]

I think you hit the nail on the head there.

Blance. It's simple, it's crisp, it's low-fat. Try some today!

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[NoOneInParticular]

All Microsoft would have to do then is pull their products from Europe, and the EU would have a lot of problems from companies and consumers alike.

And kill themselves in the process? First off, once they pull out, the software will not magically cease functioning. European business will have time to migrate. Then they will start losing their large international customers. No more Microsoft Exchange for any company that has an office in Europe. Same goes for MS office. What use is a spreadsheet if a large part of your company cannot read it? Once the big boys are using something else, smaller fish will follow the big boys and it won't take too long before Microsoft will make software only for the Redmond city council.

An international software company that cannot operate in about a third of the world economy will necessarily become just a local player.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[MysteriousPreacher]

I suppose it depends on whether there is a mechanism to follow-up on this.

Here's a nice example from Ireland. Driving penalty points were only introduced fairly recently. This meant that every time you got caught speeding or jumping traffic lights, you would get fined but nothing else. If you were fairly well-off, you just saw this as an occupational hazard. As long as you were only caught a few times a month, you just paid your fine and nothing else.

This used to happen on trains as well in the UK. You travel without a ticket and if you get away with it maybe 5 times, if you are caught and fined on the 6th occasion, you're still better off than you would have been if you were buying tickets each day.

I sincerely hope it won't work this way with MS though.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[jacksonj04]

Actually in the case of the patents it seems to be that the EU is marching unstoppably in the direction of "Go away and find something better to do", given the number of appeals and back doors the people wanting the legislation have had to lodge/find.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Eternal Annoyance]

And after a while, the EU will start doing things which /will/ harm microsoft permanently... simply because microsoft thought of it as an additional tax.

- How about a forced complete sales stop for microsoft until they comply? (hurts)
- Or forced sale/destruction of property? (patents, source code, locations, shares, etc.) (irritating to very very painful).
- Or how about a worldwide freeze on all their assets? (company/government killer).

Trust me, if microsoft still ignores the EU after that daily fine, they can expect something which will /really/ hurt... maybe even put them out of business if they are too slow to respond.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[indifferent children]

In at least one of the Scandanavian countries, the fines are a percentage of one's wealth or income (I don't know the details of the mechanism). The CEO of one of their more profitable technology companies was caught speeding and had to pay a $100k+ fine! That kind of hurts-all-offenders-equally has a nice feel to it.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[mrchaotica]

Don't real people get jail time for contempt of court? Maybe they need some of that for Microsoft...

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[ckaminski]

If you don't believe for one second that Microsoft's top 10 shareholders won't oust Bill and Steve for letting them throw away $millions in fines every year, you're naive. It's one thing to gamble on "Potential losses to competition", it's another thing to throw the baby out with the bath water.

Not having open standards hasn't stopped the Samba team. Reverse engineering only makes it harder to do something. It's not prevention. Better to concede and use that $5m per day to innovate/morph faster than the competition can keep up, which is what MS has been doing the past 10 years.

Who knows if they can keep it up however. I have a feeling WindowsXP is the end of the line for many people for the better part of this decade...

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Citizen of Earth]

$5 million a day? Big deal.

It would be interesting to find out how much Microsoft Corp. pays per day in cab fares.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[ckaminski]

Why, when those countries could import said products from other countries? Good luck getting the U.S. to prevent exports of software to Europe. Nevermind the fact that if Microsoft was so stupid to pull it's products from one of it's two biggest markets, it'll kill it's own bottom line, and the shareholders would roast Steve & Bill slowly and for a LONG time.

Microsoft cannot pull their products from any market, they are a slave to their own bottom line. Any market can adopt open source solutions at $MS-Cost +/- some percentage (open for debate).

Microsoft is just buying time to think up yet another legal loophole to try jumping through. I wouldn't expect this to last more than a few weeks. Expect resistance, and future fines however to goad MS into completing the job.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[KarmaMB84]

Oh yes. Piss off the US and the WTO and plunge us into a period of trade barriers. That would be really smart. How about we kick off World War III while we're at it? Oh wait, after the world destabilizes it'll kick off itself.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[BagMan2]

It's still a lot of money, and ultimately it just turns into a tax on the European people. If I were Microsoft, the math would go a little like this:

costOfEuropeanWindows += ($1.8billion / unitsSoldPerYearInEurope);

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[MysteriousPreacher]

That's an excellent idea. Well done those Nordics.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Enzo the Baker]

The key is that the $1.8 billion is 20% of their earnings. That kind of drop would correspond to a 20% drop in share price, assuming Wall Street wants to keep the same P/E ratio, which is big from anybody's point of view. Bill Gates would personally lose $5 billion, and Ballmer would lose $2 billion.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[bitswapper]

$1.8 billion dollars per year is a lot of money. Even to Microsoft.

Aren't they selling Xboxen at below cost? How much are they losing from that?

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[caseydk]

Uh... what happens if the EU wins and they further demonstrate that they hold total contempt for software licenses?

Does this mean that the EU can allow companies to use GPL'd stuff without fulfilling the terms?

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Big Mark]

I believe that's a loss leader, just like razor blades - they don't mind dropping a few bucks on the initial sale as they can rake it in from licence fees when the customers start buying games.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Fulcrum of Evil]

Don't real people get jail time for contempt of court? Maybe they need some of that for Microsoft...

That's a central question to the whole corporate personhood thing - how do you toss a corporation in jail?

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[alw53]

There are lots of documented cases of perjury;
throw them in jail just like Martha Stewart. Take away their licenses to practice law just like Bill Clinton.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[mrchaotica]

Well, putting a person in jail means they can't conduct their business, right? So shutting down (for a period of time) Microsoft's business would be equivalent to putting it in jail.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[memfrob]

But if Microsoft fails to comply? What are you going to do? Whine and pout?

OpenSource Mercenary Commandos. Find some angst-ridden FOSS disciples, give them pointy sticks and badges, and point them toward Redmond. Shadowrun, here we come.

You could even outfit them using the revenue stream from Microsoft fines; make them stronger, faster, more... open.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Sj0]

Most of the people who advocate trade barriers as a weapon ignore the fact that the economy isn't an abstract thing, it's made up of the transfer of goods and services.

For example, I'm certain that many americans would support Free Trade very quickly in the event of a US/Canada trade war if it cut off power and water trade between the two countries. I can think of a few states which really couldn't go without the resources for long.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[omb]

It is NOT USD 5 mil per day, it is 5% of global worldwide annual global turnover per day at maximum; ie 20 days 0 income in 2005! Much more like it.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[neko9]

RTFA! its "5 percent of their global turnover each day" not 5 million. "...In its last fiscal year, the twelve months up to 22 July, 2004, Microsoft achieved revenues of $36.84bn the equivalent of around $100m dollars a day."

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[piovere]

I personally feel like a legitimate argument could be made for government interference in business as follows: free market implies that the market reacts to shape the companies that sell to it. In a representative government, the government theoretically reflects the will of the people, and is therefore a creation of the market. As such, interference from the government is just one of the means by which a market can react to a company's action.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[cheesybagel]

Once there are software patents in the EU, reverse-engineering may not be possible, provided that interface is patented.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[geekee]

Why don't they just assasinate Bill Gates while they're at it If your going to take away MS's freedom, why stop at these things?

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[innocent_white_lamb]

And the fines are based on gross income.

Gross income?

Heavens t'Murgatroyd, as Snagglepus would say. Gross?

What about self-employed people like, say, the corner store where he may take in thousands every month but pay 90% of it back out again in wages for his employees, cost of goods, and so on. His gross may be hundreds of thousands a year; his net might be ten or twenty thousand.

Are you sure it's based on gross income?

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[geekee]

Not sure why you picked Larry Flynt, but it's a great analogy. Larry Flynt was persecuted for selling a product people didn't want other people having. MS is being punished for merely selling a product in a manner some people don't want it to be sold, many of whom have no intention of ever using (like many /.ers). Yet the govt. feels they have the right to take away freedom in both cases, because of some notion of serving the greater public good, whatever that means.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[Fulcrum of Evil]

There are lots of documented cases of perjury; throw them in jail just like Martha Stewart. Take away their licenses to practice law just like Bill Clinton.

What did Martha Stewart Inc. do that landed Martha Stewart in jail?

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[jafac]

The moment a Government steps in, and asks for a tax, or builds a road for workers to drive to work, or grants a patent or copyright, or even gives a Limited Liability or other Charter, there is no more "Free Market".

The government has intervened.

Sometimes government intervention is equally favorable. Sometimes it's favorable to some, and not to others.

Your phrase "The US Tends to be so Free Market that corps step on the little guy" has it wrong. When the government favors a corporation, it's intervening in the Free Market just as much as when the government favors consumers or workers (the little guy). The US is FAR from Free Market. "Free Market" is used as a slogan for times when certain politicians want to paint other politicians as bad, or times when they want to enact legislation that favors a corporation, etc. That's really the only place "Free Market" actually comes into play in any real way in our economy.

And FYI: with regard to your remark about Europe and unemployment figures, it's mostly because most Eurpean countries calculate unemployment in a more honest fashion than we do here in the US. If the US computed unemployment in the same way (include workers who have dropped off the roles because they've found part-time work, or have given up looking), it would be closer to 9.5%. Neither here nor there with regard to which is a "correct" way of calculating a true unemployment figure. I'm ambivalent on that. I *do* oppose though, people who use this standard Rush Limbaugh line to discredit European government, when they're comparing apples to oranges.

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[wendyg]

I suggested something similar to an analyst one time when I was writing an article about this, and he said that in fact although yes, the company can afford the *money* no company that wants to do business in Europe (and Microsoft gets a fair percentage of its revenues from Europe) is going to simply pay the fine and ignore the ruling. They could be held in contempt of court, and greater sanctions imposed, and it could be made very uncomfortable for them to continue doing business.

Not gonna happen.

wg

Re:Like Larry Flynt

[kisak]

I have a feeling they still have some wiggle room to increase them if MS decides to play the "pay and carry on as usual" game.

That is how the EU got Bush to back down from him illegal steel tariffs. The tariffs were supposed to start slowly with low tariffs but every month the tariffs would increase. It didn't take Bush long to figure out that he wasn't as tough as he thought.

holy crap!

[The Other White Boy]

i know there aren't a lot of microsoft supporters/fans around these parts (understatement of the year) ... but isn't $5M a day a bit, oh i dunno, steep?

Re:holy crap!

[0x461FAB0BD7D2]

It's only 5% of their global revenue. In any case, no one is forcing Microsoft to pay that much. But if Microsoft is not going to get its act together, the EU has to make it hurt.

Re:holy crap!

[gstoddart]

i know there aren't a lot of microsoft supporters/fans around these parts (understatement of the year) ... but isn't $5M a day a bit, oh i dunno, steep?

Because it's been solidly demonstrated that if you don't do something very large to dissuade Microsoft, they will ignore you.

In this case they were told they needed to open up their protocols and stop being anti-competitive, or they'd face something like this.

In their usual way, they've decided that charging you large amounts of money to have access to those protocols, as well as preventing everyone in the open source arena from actually using this stuff was what was called for. Basically this violates the letter and spirit of the ruling against Microsoft.

The US DoJ basically stopped pursuing this when Bush got into office. At least the EU actually has the smarts to actually enforce their rulings.

It is entirely against the long-term interests of the entire industry for Microsoft to say 'you can't write software that talks to our software'. All Your Base is not acceptable in this case.

Re:holy crap!

[jeffy124]

MS has something like $40 billion in cash lying around in their bank accounts. $5m/day * 365 days/year = $1.825 billion/year. I think MS can afford it with little trouble, and the amount is small enough it'll get treated as cost of doing business. A _much_ larger amount per day might get their attention.

Re:holy crap!

[Anonymous Coward]

It is entirely against the long-term interests of the entire industry for Microsoft to say 'you can't write software that talks to our software'.

It is entirely against the long-term interests of the entire industry for governments to say 'you must write software in ways we approve or we'll seize your revenue and/or exclude you from the marketplace'.

Let consumers decide what they want. If you don't like their decisions don't reach for the guns of government to get your way.

Re:holy crap!

[yabos]

It's called deterrence. Make them pay a TONNE of money if they don't comply. MS has repeately gotten small kicks in the ass for their actions and then keeps doing them. So now, they'll get a big kick in the ass.

Re:holy crap!

[SpongeBobLinuxPants]

So, here's the plan:
1. Fine MS $5 million a day
2. Buy special MS protocal license with fines collected
3. PROFIT!!!

Re:holy crap!

[tmortn]

But the problem is that the consumers DON'T have a choice. Hence the term MONOPOLY. M$ has been found guilty of using its MONOPOLY position in the market to leverage other competitors out which leaves consumers with no choice.

This is precisely the case in which the 'guns of government' need to be used and it is long overdue.

Re:holy crap!

[Anonymous Coward]

As an American and a Windows user, I'm ashamed at how the American government has dealt with Microsoft. If someone else can do a better job, then I'm all for it. ~1.8 billion dollars every year flowing out of the country is very little to pay for a chance at better protection from monopolistic anticompetitive business such as Microsoft.

Re:holy crap!

[Zemran]

[ but isn't $5M a day a bit, oh i dunno, steep? ]

Not really, they had a choice. They could have complied with the spirit of the initial order and done what was required. Instead they chose to flagerantly flout the order to try to make the order benefit themselves, which is an insult to the court. They are now in a worse situation as they do not have any sympathy of the court. They only have themselves to blame.

Re:holy crap!

[Dutchmaan]

Perhaps the customers ARE deciding via their elected government..

You know.. a government is supposed to REPRESENT THE PEOPLE.

Re:holy crap!

[Decaff]

It is entirely against the long-term interests of the entire industry for governments to say 'you must write software in ways we approve or we'll seize your revenue and/or exclude you from the marketplace'.

They can write the software any way they like.

They just can't restrict access to their platform or APIs because they happen to be in a monopoly situation. As windows is so widespread other companies should have the ability to make use of the platform and integrate with in the same way as Microsoft does.

Re:holy crap!

[Anonym0us Cow Herd]

$5 Billion a day would be steep.
$5 Million a day is chump change. Cheapo. A cost of doing business.

Re:holy crap!

[NoOneInParticular]

The EU has actually waited a long time to let the US take care of the issues with Microsoft. Only after Bush let them off the hook did the EU start to pursue this course of action. So, in all fairness, the EU has been very lenient towards Microsoft, but since the US government doesn't seem to care about its own markets, the EU starts defending theirs.

Basically, it's the US's own fault.

Re:holy crap!

[geminidomino]

You know.. a government is supposed to REPRESENT THE PEOPLE

Holy crap... you managed to say that with a straight face. You should be in POLITICS!

Re:holy crap!

[MysteriousPreacher]

If the American government can't fix the problem, then it's up to other governments to do what they can.

What would you rather have? The EU takes legal action against MS or tries to institute a change of regime in the states?

Slightly off-topic here but this is what the ICC is about. If a country can deal with a crim itself, then the ICC has no need to be involved. If they are unable to do it, then the ICC is needed. For example, if a British soldier commits war crimes and the British government is not seen to be taking action.

Re:holy crap!

[pla]

i know there aren't a lot of microsoft supporters/fans around these parts (understatement of the year) ... but isn't $5M a day a bit, oh i dunno, steep?

Consider what Microsoft has actually done to get that penalty... This has nothing to do with failing to open up their protocols, and everything to do with all but telling the EU the go fornicate with itself.

Governments don't like that - If one company gets away with it, the rest will join in very quickly.

However, in this situation, Microsoft still has one rather drastic course of action left... Totally pull out of all EU countries, block them from any updates, then push out a service pack that addresses a few dozen critical exploits, including "proof of concept" code to "demonstrate" those exploits. Overnight, Windows becomes impossible to run without an instant rooting anywhere in Europe.

On the down side (from MS's perspective), this would greatly boost Linux support. But the cost to change over, and the damage that would occur during the transition could add up to enough to crash a few smaller economies (imagine the IRS, the DMV, and the FBI's records all vanishing at once to get an idea of the potential cracker-induced damage).


Kinda scary to think that a single company could destroy whole governments with just a few carefully-planned steps. And THAT justifies the $5M fine per day - Fear that Microsoft might have realized just how much power they have, not just in a monetary sense, but in a critical infrastructure sense.

And if anyone needs a better argument for Open Source, I can't think of one...

Re:holy crap!

[HiThere]

??? You say MS wrote software WELL ??? With a straight face?

I used an IBM 7094 with FAP, an IBM 360 with TDOS, a CDC 3800 with Scope, a CDC 7600 with (modified) Scope, a 360 with JES2, an Apple II, a Harris Regal system, a Molecular Computer with customized CP/M, an Apple various Macs with Systems 1-7.5, MS Wind 95-98, and Linux starting with Red Hat 5.2.

Of those all, the only ones worse that MS was the Harris Regal system. Then came MS systems with EULAs that I wouldn't allow to be installed for legal reasons...and MS was totally out of consideration.

For applications, the best word processor I ever used was MS Word 5.2a on the Mac II system 7. It was uphill from MSWord 3 on the Mac (which was worse than MacWrite) allthe way to 5.2a...then it started a (sometimes) slow decline in quality, but it was downhill all the way until I stopped using it. (For EULA reasons.)

What MS has been good at is selling watered excrement to ignorant victims, and convincing them that it was excellent soup. (Well, that's a triffle strong...but not excessively so. Really they seem to pay no attention at all to what they are selling, merely to the selling.)

Re:holy crap!

[lgw]

Nah, Microsoft doesn't have that power. For one thing, the US government wouldn't put up with it (too many other powerful companies would be hurt). For another, MS source code isn't exactly secret, just illegal to use. The EU could create a company for maintenance, give them all the MS soruce code that's ever been leaked, give them the resources to reverse-engineer anything that hadn't been leaked, and then engage in predatory dumping of the MS OS knockoff in all possible markets.

Attacking the critical infrastucture of a government is an act of war. The EU can't respond with physical violence, but they wouldn't need to. It would be costly, no doubt, but in the end it's the EU that would be left standing.

Unless, of course, the voters in the EU actually sided with Microsoft.

Re:holy crap!

[Dutchmaan]

The government represents the people much in the same way that the consumer's choice is reflected in their purchaes...

The people are limited in their choices for representation in government much in the same way that people's choices are limited when dealing with business..

My point was simply refuting the parent posters point of the market being the final determination of the will of the people..

The only clear fact is that the people are severely limited in their choices.

Re:holy crap!

[gstoddart]

However, in this situation, Microsoft still has one rather drastic course of action left... Totally pull out of all EU countries, block them from any updates, then push out a service pack that addresses a few dozen critical exploits, including "proof of concept" code to "demonstrate" those exploits.
And then go from a charge of abusing your monolopy position into a charge of widespread terrorism and attempting to undermine governments. All of the executives of Microsoft's European go to jail, and their European assets are frozen.

There are legal business entities operating in those countries, registered in those countries. They're not a patch, crash, and run away from being able to screw over European countries.

Re:holy crap!

[Cassius105]

Thats entirely the point

as a consumer i cannot choose what i use

As much as i would like to use Linux exclusivly the fact i am a gamer stops me doing this at the moment due to microsofts monopoly

Re:holy crap!

[Emperor Cezar]

Don't have a choice? So, that's why I use linux for my servers and linux for my desktops? That's also why people I know use macs. This is all because I have a choice. To say I don't is illogical.

There is no such thing as a monopoly in software, it is an abstract concept. It is like saying someone has a monopoly in math.

I used to want Microsoft split up. Then I realized that I, like most people, are angry at Microsoft for some reason or another. Instead of just not buying their software anymore or recommending linux to people, we want to use the guns of the government to get revenge.

I still have not see an example of A)Fraud B)Theft C)Any real crime with a victim. If it can be shown that any of those occured, then that is what those who commited the crimes should be prosecuted for.

They write the software, they can sell it how they like. If you don't like it, don't buy it. Just as you are not forced into how you buy it, they should not be forced into selling it a certain way. Freedom goes BOTH directions.

Re:holy crap!

[penguinoid]

Kinda scary to think that a single company could destroy whole governments with just a few carefully-planned steps. And THAT justifies the $5M fine per day - Fear that Microsoft might have realized just how much power they have, not just in a monetary sense, but in a critical infrastructure sense.

Not really. For one thing, governements and any important businesses will have daily (or more frequent) backups of anything important, redundancy, and also a variety of operating systems (even if these are not official). What they could do is halt any progress for a while.

They could cause much pain, but that would be a suicidal move -- everyone in the entire world would switch away from Microsoft as soon as anything like this happens. No one would risk such a catastrophe happening to them.

Re:holy crap!

[geminidomino]

The government represents the people much in the same way that the consumer's choice is reflected in their purchaes...

Sure, if that choice is between Brand A foodstuffs, which contains shards of broken glass, or Brand B foodstuffs, now with tapeworms and rusty spoons.

Re:holy crap!

[geekee]

"But the problem is that the consumers DON'T have a choice. Hence the term MONOPOLY. M$ has been found guilty of using its MONOPOLY position in the market to leverage other competitors out which leaves consumers with no choice."

Yes, I don't have a choice of using Linux, BSD, MacOS, etc, I only have the choice of using Windows.

Re:holy crap!

[geekee]

You're lying or stupid is you think MacOS 1-7 was better than Win95 and beyond. I've used both, and MacOS was by far the worse of the two. MacOS had no memory protection, memory management was a joke (remember having to tell the OS how much memory a program could use?), and no premeptive multitasking.

Re:holy crap!

[geekee]

" Perhaps the customers ARE deciding via their elected government..

You know.. a government is supposed to REPRESENT THE PEOPLE."

So if the majority of people think slavery is fine or that GPL should be outlawed, it should be done? Governments shouldn't be able to tread on rights, even if the majority of people think it's ok.

Re:holy crap!

[bitwiseNomad]

Yes, I don't have a choice of using Linux, BSD, MacOS, etc, I only have the choice of using Windows.

Say for a moment that both you and I own our own firms. You run Linux on your workstations and I run Windows. I have Microsoft Office and you have Open Office. One day, I want to send you a document. Maybe it's a nicely formatted quote for a product or service you wish to purchase from us. Maybe I want to send you a purchase order for something I wish to buy from you. I send the document as an Office 2000 (or 2004 or 2005 or whatever) document.

What's that you say? Can't open .doc's? What's that you say? Can't do business without proper documentation? Looks like you need to get Office for Linux. What's that you say? No Office for Linux? Looks like you'd better go buy Windows.

Before you say it, I am aware that there are other ways of moving documents to and fro besides .doc's or .swx's (the primary Open Office format). I'm not saying that there isn't a solution to the problem you and I are having in this hypothetical situation. What I am saying is that it's not so cut and dry as to what choices you or anyone else actually have.

Because Microsoft workstations account for 90% + of all workstations in business, much of the documentation that is passed back and forth is in Microsoft's proprietary (and closed) format. This is bad because unless someone pays money to Microsoft for a copy of Windows and Office, that person will be severly limited in both the people they can communicate with and the ways in which they can communicate in the business world.

The objection is not that Microsoft makes software that is too good and makes too much money. The objection is that because their software is so pervasive, they are doing harm by not telling others how to interoperate with their software. Since Open Office can not read .doc's, you can't do business if you use Linux on your workstations, even if your business has absolutely nothing to do with computers. That is bad. That is why many people do not have a choice and must pay for Windows and Office even if they don't want to.

Re:holy crap!

[Art Tatum]

Attacking the critical infrastucture of a government is an act of war. The EU can't respond with physical violence

Which is why I can't respect them or even accept that they are a legitimate government. They would be irresponsible in such a situation. The purpose of government is the defense of the people. They would become as illegitimate in shirking their duties as Louis XVI.

Re:holy crap!

[HiThere]

I'm not lying.

OTOH, I'm not thinking of using systems outside the range of activities for which they were design, and I'll grant that the early Mac systems weren't very good at processing multiple applications simultanteouly. (But neither was MSWind3.1...their closest chronological comparison.)

Still, what I was asserting was something other than what you are asserting. I was asserting that MS software was and is ill-designed. That it did not perform up to specifications. Etc. And yes, I can pick flaws in every system I've ever used. It used to be a joke at the office, before it got old, that I always preferred the previous systems. This really wasn't true until I started using MSWind, but I did always complain about the flaws. However even in hindsight (I don't use MS software since the EULA became unacceptable) MS had the worst software, i.e., the most flaws and misfeatures, of any system I've ever used except for the Harris Regal.

No, I wouldn't want to do graphics on an IBM 7094. That's totally missing the point.

Re:holy crap!

[Zontar The Mindless]

> Overnight, Windows becomes impossible to run
> without an instant rooting anywhere in Europe.

As opposed to the special protection that Europe enjoys against this happening now, right?

Re:holy crap!

[tehdaemon]

But the 'guns of the government' are already in the way. They are called copyright and patent laws.

I am a free market guy as much or than the next person, but this is not a case of free market or no, this is a debate over what and how much the government is going to intervene.

Re:holy crap!

[tmortn]

90% of the market precludes choice when that market share is used to keep competitors from being a viable alternative.

You want crime? Fine, it has been deemed Illeagal on Penalty of Law to leverage your market share into an unfair advantage. Are you going to try and claim this is not what M$ is doing?

Re:holy crap!

[Emperor Cezar]

I said "real crime" with a "real victim". Not a "we might have been hurt by microsoft doing something somewhere else." The drug war is a nice set of laws whose victims are those that are hurt by someone doing something somewhere else.

Interesting..

[danheskett]

The little blurb posted makes it sound like the EU ordered MS to create a license that was compatible with the GPL.

Is that the case? I can't find anything suggesting that the EU "named names" by saying the GPL or any specific license.

Anyone have any more insight? Did the EU really order MS to be compatible in this regard with a specific license, or is this just a poorly worded writeup (or is it just me)?

Re:Interesting..

[big-giant-head]

I don't belive it had to GPL compatible, however it had to be usable by smaller companies and M$ license fee was too expensive.

They could probably comply with the EU by cutting the license fee by 75%.

Re:Interesting..

[oscartheduck]

Peculiarly enough, the article posted has more insight: "The European Commission has rejected Microsoft's proposed server interoperability licence, saying that it contained a number of serious flaws including unjustifiably high royalty fees and the exclusion of open source vendors." So the write up was an accurate summary of the article that you haven't read.

Re:Interesting..

[danheskett]

open sources != GPL.

I am asking if there was ever a specific mention of the GPL - ie, has the GPL been recognized by the EU in a specific way, or was it always just the more general and vague "open source" definition.

Re:Interesting..

[mattyrobinson69]

if the license is open source compatible, that means it can be freely distrobuted for no fee, making it compatible with all the open source licenses i know of and care about.

Re:Interesting..

[Phisbut]

however it had to be usable by smaller companies and M$ license fee was too expensive.

That, and the licence also forbids software using this licence to be open-source, which does nothing to encourage competition.

Re:Interesting..

[danheskett]

You are referring to "GPL" compatible, or "OSI" approved.

Not the same as "open source".

Re:Interesting..

[mattyrobinson69]

are there any licenses which could be called open source which aren't freely distrobutable and open source?

Re:Interesting..

[danheskett]

Ohh dozens of licenses are not accepted by the OSI or FSF as sufficently "open source". Look at licenses like Sun Public License, the Microsoft Shared Source license, etc. These are licenses where the source is "open", but you cant distribute changes. That's what I asked what type of license the EU is thinking of.

Great...

[sammykrupa]

I bet the goverment hopes Microsoft won't comply. They will be muching of MS for years.........

$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[tepples]

$1.8 billion a year would be a big boost to free software if an EU agency were to funnel it into free software development. That would anger Microsoft more than increasing the fine would.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[suso]

Haha, that would be awesome. Actually Microsoft will probably pay at least $5 million for today or tommorow. At least that money could go towards free software development. $5 million goes a long way if its used right and not pocketed by 15 administrators along the way.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[DataPath]

I think a neat way for them to "spend" the Microsoft fines would be to put up bounties on open source software and features that the commission deems valuable to itself and the EU.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Saeed al-Sahaf]

$1.8 billion a year would be a big boost to free software if an EU agency were to funnel it into free software development.

Sure, right! What are the chances that big government will actually apply a fine towards fixing the problem the fine was levied for? Like ZILCH?

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Shakrai]

You see nothing wrong with using the tyrannical force of the state to take money from one party to give to another?

No, because using the power of the state of redirect wealth from Microsoft is a good thing (tm) because it punishes Microsoft who are obviously the source of all that is wrong in the IT sector.

Using the power of the state to enforce reliability standards on cell phones/VOIP or to regulate private space travel so we don't have spent rocket boosters falling on our houses is a bad thing (tm) because it will stifle innovation.

Such is the /. group think. Microsoft will be killed by market forces (Linux, Firefox, etc) because 800 pound guerilla's can change direction about as fast as a two mile long freight train can stop.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[geordie_loz]

Tyrannical? I'm sorry but the Law is the Law, and Microsoft have broke it in a place where they wish to do business. They have the option to obey the law and do business or not do business at all.

The fine is becasue they are not obeying the law still. So how is this abusing Microsoft? They're making a big deal about legality of software and media and patents etc.. They can't want the law in one case and not in the other.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[hutchy]

No, I do not.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[LurkerXXX]

But there is a difference between enforcing standards and subsidizing some 3rd party. If they want to fine someone for not going along with standards, that's great. But why should the fine money be given to OSS developers? Would you want them to give the money to Apple? Sun? IBM? Those companies might obey the standards, should the government hand the fine money over to them? No.

When I get a fine for speeding in my car, the money doesn't go the the little old lady put-putting around on a sunday drive. The government uses it for running the governmnet and enforcing polices, etc. They don't just give it away to 'competitors'.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Anonym0us Cow Herd]

You see nothing wrong with using the tyrannical force of the state to take money from one party to give to another?

I'll remember that argumenet the next time I have a speeding ticket.

The local government uses its tyrannical power to fine me and then give that money to the local school system or some other party.

Microsoft has defied a court order here. They should be fined. Or maybe you believe that all global megacorps or indeed anyone should be able to defy court orders with impunity?

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Richthofen80]

So what you're saying is, open source should steal from closed source, instead of selling its software on its own merits?

It would be a big boost to me If i were able to funnell the fortune of, say , Lenardo Dicaprio, into my own bank account.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Guppy06]

It's called "due process." It's mentioned in the Fifth Amendment of the US Constitution. Microsoft was tried by a competent court of EU law and was found guilty by said court. This is part of the punishment for having been found guilty, and this form of punishment is neither cruel nor unusual (Eighth Amendment).

Even rabid libertarians must agree that the state suits some purpose by enforcing the law and empowering the wronged to seek compensation after having a ruling in their favor. That is what this is.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[tepples]

So what you're saying is, open source should steal from closed source, instead of selling its software on its own merits?

Using anticompetitive practices, proprietary software publishers have stolen and continue to steal from free software publishers. This fine is what database people call a "compensating transaction".

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Shajenko42]

Give it a month, when the EU is reported to have "Weapons of Mass Destruction." In this case, it'll actually be true.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Frank T. Lofaro Jr.]

Maybe 5 million dollars might be enough to get the Linux uptime rolls over at 497 days/tick overflow bug fixed! :)

Or would that take 5 billion?

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[jxs2151]

That was my point. When someone suggests using the fine money to subsidize an agenda we are not too far from making up reasons to fine companies to finance others. Slippery slope.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[KarmaMB84]

They should be fined and the money used for running the EU, not funding MS competitors. That is punishing MS twice (fine + funding their own competitors).

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[ckaminski]

Oh Wah! Cry me a river. :-)

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[jxs2151]

You missed my point- the tyranny part comes in when it is suggested that the state take from one party to give to another. I know that in this case the aggrieved party is Microsoft so you agree with the scenario but in the future the tyranny may not be one that you agree with. By then, with your support, the tyranny will have become ingrained and accepted and it will be too late. Suggesting that money be taken from one party for the express purpose of funding another is dangerous.

BTW, the part about global mega...blah, blah is a strawman and as such I will not address it.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[ckaminski]

Witness Cigarette manufacturers in the U.S.

Witness gun lawsuits, and why Colt, arguably the maker of the finest handguns on earth, dropped out of the consumer market.

The precedent has been set.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[jxs2151]

You also missed the point. See above concerning taking money from one party to give to another.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[BagMan2]

Agreed, this is really a matter for the State Department to handle. If Microsoft feels some foreign country is imposing unfair restrictions on their business practices there, then the only remedy Microsoft has is to petition the US Government to put pressure on the EU. There are countless agreements between the US and the EU regarding trade.

The EU fine could arguably be called a tariff, and ultimately the WTO may have to chime in on this.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Locke2005]

In fact, Microsoft wants it both ways: they rely on the court and police powers of the state to enforce copyrights, patetns, and trademarks to make their proprietary software business model succeed, yet still reserve the right to give the finger to those same courts and police when they make a ruling that Microsoft disagrees with! Here's a simple, zero cost solution: have the governments give a simple ultimatum to Microsoft in effect saying: "Either stop abusing your monopoly power, or we stop enforcing any and all regulations against infringement of Microsoft copyrights, patents, or trademarks." That would certainly get their attention, don't you think?

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[ahodgson]

That's basically ALL the state does, is take money from one party to give to another. That and shoot people it disagrees with.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[idlake]

No, because using the power of the state of redirect wealth from Microsoft is a good thing (tm) because it punishes Microsoft who are obviously the source of all that is wrong in the IT sector.

Using the power of the state to redirect wealth can be a good thing (it can also be a bad thing--farm subsidies, for example). We use taxation for that. Microsoft probably doesn't pay its fair share. But that's an entirely unrelated matter.

This good thing is an even better thing: using the power of the state to enforce the law. Microsoft has broken the law, and they need to be punished for that. Enforcing laws is even more fundamental than taxation.

Microsoft will be killed by market forces (Linux, Firefox, etc) because 800 pound guerilla's can change direction about as fast as a two mile long freight train can stop.

Microsoft can be killed by market forces if they actually operate in a free market. In order to keep markets free, we have laws and we have enforcement of those laws. Those laws are lenient enough, but Microsoft still managed to violate them, so they need to be punished for their past behavior and forced to comply with the law.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[idlake]

Publicly financed open source software is not a "competitor" of Microsoft in the economic sense, it's the creation of a public good. The public good happens to kill Microsoft's business model, but that doesn't make it a competitor.

Furthermore, what makes you think that "punishing twice" wouldn't be taken into account in determining the amount? Giving $x to a competitor instead of $x to the EU would just amount to a different amount of punishment.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Darby]

That is punishing MS twice (fine + funding their own competitors).

Sounds like the carrot *and* the stick.

Nothing else has had the slightest effect on their criminal actions, so why is this a problem exactly?

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[r_j_howell]

Sorry, the state does this to me all the time. Takes my taxes and gives them to schools, the army, poor people, big corporations that need tax breaks and subsidies. Happens all the time.

Though I doubt that the EU will fund free software with the money (I'm sure they'll find some other need for it). It wouldn't be that different than the recent tobacco setlements, If the states had done what they were supposed to, that is.

>>global mega...blah, blah is a strawman

There are people on slashdot that think that corporations running their lives is even worse than governments running their lives. The grandparent seems to be one of those.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[soulhuntre]

Tyrannical? I'm sorry but the Law is the Law

And we shoudl all follow it - unless it keeps us from stealing intellectual property - then it's you know, bad.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[CodeBuster]

Using the power of the state to redirect wealth can be a good thing

If you really believe that then why not move to Cuba, you would probably be happier living there where they redirect wealth on a massive scale and the standard of living is among the lowest in the northern hemisphere. The use of state power to transfer wealth from one private group to another distributes only poverty and ultimately makes slaves of all people.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Anonym0us Cow Herd]

You missed my point- the tyranny part comes in when it is suggested that the state take from one party to give to another. I know that in this case the aggrieved party is Microsoft so you agree with the scenario but in the future the tyranny may not be one that you agree with

It is done all the time. When a court imposes a fine, the money goes somewhere. It may be "damages" rather than a fine. The damages go to the victim, in this case, EU computer users who are harmed by Microsoft's improper behavior. It would be completely proper for the government to help create alternative software for its citizens who were harmed by the behavior and defiance of a court order by a powerful foriegn company.

Nobody is suggesting arbitrarily taking money from party A and giving it to B. If the government were to use some of its extra money to "bid" on open source projects to accomplish certian national goals, what is tyrannical about that?

Or is it only tyrannical because it affects Microsoft? But it is not tyrannical that other companies are routinely fined for flagrantly violating court orders -- while at the same time the government uses money in ways that are unhelpful to the same company.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Sj0]

What exactly do you expect to accomplish by attacking "the slashdot groupthink" in such a way, anyway? If you're complaining because it bothers you so horribly, don't read the comments. If you feel that you can effect change, do so in a positive way so you might actually do so -- trying to insult someone is about the least effective way of affecting someone.

Frankly, the post you're replying to shows that you're wrong -- some people read this and thought "is this a good idea?", myself included.

So what is your purpose? Do you just like hearing yourself talk? If not, change your methods to something useful, because your only wasting your time with your current method.

BTW, Microsoft won't fall. If it started to, it would be propped up by the government. It represents a significant portion of the american economy, and like other major corps, is immortal in ways you couldn't imagine. Whether you think that's good or bad depends on where your priorities lie.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Sj0]

I don't have a firm opinion on handguns, but the tobacco industry brought it upon themselves. If you believe that the decietful tactics they used a generation ago isn't worthy of prolonged punishment as that generation dies, then I have to question what IS worthy.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Sj0]

Unless you're living in a tax free haven, then you're probably full of shit; you drive on the roads, you take advantage of subsidized or free healthcare, you live in a city protected by policemen and firemen...

Slave, free thyself.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[jxs2151]

The problem I have with all this is not the fact that someone is getting fined. I have a problem when actions get us closer and closer to the tail wagging the dog and governments (empowered by the screamers) start making up reasons to confiscate money to give to another party.

The Romans did this kinds of shit and look what happened to them- all the Italians have now is a whole bunch of really old buildings.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[cayenne8]

"When I get a fine for speeding in my car, the money doesn't go the the little old lady put-putting around on a sunday drive. The government uses it for running the governmnet and enforcing polices, etc. They don't just give it away to 'competitors'."

Actually, in most cases, it goes to the POLICE departments themselves...which I think creates a conflict of interest...

Speeding tickets are now a revenue generating aparatus, not a safety measure. I think actually it WOULD be more fare, to redistribute the traffic fines to those citizens that did not commit any infractions that year.

If you take the revenue out of the traffic tickets from the cops...I wonder how fast their vigilance for writing out tickets would drop?

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[LurkerXXX]

Why the heck should I be paid because someone else is speeding? They are just going to have to increase my taxes so that they can afford the enforcement to catch the speeders, then pay for more overhead to distribute the money to the non-speeding (but not speeding) citizens. Who then have to pay the money back in taxes to pay for enforcement, to generate more money to give back, loop, loop, loop....

Why add the useless bureaucracy??? Have those who speed directly pay for the enforcement, as it is now. Much less overhead than shuffling the money back and forth and losing it to overhead in the process.

And if you are saying this should be done with MS's fine, who gets the money?

Does Redhat get some?

Does Linus get some?

Does Stallman?

Does some go to Theo and the OpenBSD group?

Does Apple get some if they are complying with open standards?

Does Sun?

How about DragonflyBSD?

How about Joe's Crackhead Linux Distro?

Who decides who all gets the money? Does Joe's Crackhead Distro get the same amount of money that Apple does?

It's a ridiculous concept. You can't be 'fair' with it. The best thing is to let the government use the money for enforcement, etc. 'Giving it to OSS' is just stupid.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[Guppy06]

I used it as an example for the presumably American parent.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[ckaminski]

I plead the common sense argument: you willing inject harmful smoke into your body, 10, 20 sticks at a time. And when you get sick, you want to sue the person who made and sold you the sticks, but never actually forced you to use them?

No. Not buying it. If a gun manufacturer was knowingly selling handguns to a crack dealer with serious and obvious criminal record, I'd expect them to get raped in a court-room.

If Dow Chemical spills something in Lake Punkatawsett and doesn't tell anyone, and 10 years later all the kids have 14 toes, then they should get slaughtered in court.

If I eat nothing but double-quarter pounders with cheese and grow to 800 pounds and die of heart failure, my children have cause to sue fast food manufacturers?

But Big Tobacco? I'm apalled. But it was a settlement, not a judicial verdict, so I have hopes for the future.

While I have great distaste for big tobacco, I have no sympathy for those who continue to pollute their lungs. As you should have no sympathy for me overeating and being a 350# lardass.

Regards,
-Chris

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[nickos]

This post is way too late for anyone to read but I wanted to take issue with your last point:

"There are people on slashdot that think that corporations running their lives is even worse than governments running their lives. The grandparent seems to be one of those."

I would rather run my own life, but if the choice is between corporations and the government I would choose the government. At least the government is accountable to the public very 4 years.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[cyberjessy]

$1.8 billion a year would be a big boost to free software if an EU agency were to funnel it into free software development. That would anger Microsoft more than increasing the fine would.

The governments and law should stand up to deliver and ensure Justice, not free software. What about other commercial projects competing with these free software products? Will it not be unfair?

If you funnel 1.8 BILLION dollars into the free software industry, it will be disastrous for many closed source commercial products which have a free and open source alternative. They will have to change their operational style, or close shop. And about operational style, insisting on a certain method of functioning (open source) is not really the kind of freedom that we are so keen to protect.

Sometimes I wish people will not be so blinded by the free and open way of doing things. It may be good, better or best. But the defenders of freedom should not themselves suppress freedom.

Re:$1.8 billion a year is a lot of dough

[leecn]

You are whining about what some /.er said he thought should be done with the money. RELAX. Do you really think the EU is going to give the money to open source projects? I don't.

$5m a day?

[chman]

I was wondering how Brown was going to afford those bus passes for the elderly. He's a sneaky one, that Chancellor.

Re:$5m a day?

[Anonymous Coward]

This is an EU decision not the UK's. The elderley will be too busy spending their £200 bribes on lottery tickets to even think about using the bus.

Re:$5m a day?

[Anne Thwacks]

Well speed cameras watching Windows boxes was not going to earn much dosh, was it?

Sure they need to comply.

[AltGrendel]

Microsoft seems to be pretending that they are dealing with a customer, not a goverment. This kind of tactic will shoot them in the foot because they are ignoring the sovereignty of the EU. The EU won't put up with it since it will dilute their power.

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[mpe]

Microsoft seems to be pretending that they are dealing with a customer, not a goverment.

Probably because they are used to dealing with government in the US.

This kind of tactic will shoot them in the foot because they are ignoring the sovereignty of the EU. The EU won't put up with it since it will dilute their power.

Assuming Microsoft cannot bribe their way around it.

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[ruiner13]

When you are Microsoft, and you make more money per year than all but a few states in the US, you start acting like a government yourself. Hell, MS could make Redmond succede from the union and still be a profitable contry.

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[KarmaMB84]

If the EU is so sovereign, why don't they just take one seat in the UN? Oh wait, they want to pretend they're just one giant nation in the economic and political arena but they want to keep all their votes in the UN.

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[Locke2005]

No, they KNOW their dealing with the EU, and that EU ministers can be bought... presumably for a lot less than $5 million per day!

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[ckaminski]

No, because the War of Corporate Aggression would see the U.S. Government:

A) Seize all Microsoft assets, with tanks and guns. Including all that precious source code
B) Prevent Microsoft from doing business in it's first largest market, the U.S. (which is why Microsoft's threats to leave the country if it was broken in three back in 1999/2000 were generally seen as schoolyard bluster).
C) Shareholders would throw a fit at loss of shareholder value.

Microsoft cannot move fast enough to avoid any of the above three. It certainly cannot avoid B).

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[Bastian]

Or strongarm their way through it.

I'm not convinced that the fact that most US and state government agencies are hopelessly committed to Microsoft products doesn't play into the power situation between the USA and MS.

I haven't had much contact with any European government agencies, but judging by how Europe seems to be a haven for alternative computing platforms, I get the impression that this wouldn't be as serious of an issue in Europe as it is here in the US.

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[bar-agent]

If the EU is so sovereign, why don't they just take one seat in the UN? Oh wait, they want to pretend they're just one giant nation in the economic and political arena but they want to keep all their votes in the UN.

Come on, don't be pissy. It is just like the United States. The States never gave up their sovereignty when they joined up, it's just that, for convenience and efficiency, the States decided to present a united face to the world. The Feds take care of international relations and a common currency, the States were supposed to take care of everything else.

Of course, back in the day, they didn't really have international bodies like the U.N., AFAIK. If there were such bodies, the States might well have kept their votes there, too. Except that voting wasn't really a big thing back then, either. So, I dunno.

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[uncommonlygood]

If Microsoft don't pay, what's going to happen to them? Is the EU really going to tell them to stop trading in the EU, and do god knows how horrific damage to it's own economy which relies on MS software?

Re:Sure they need to comply.

[DarkAce911]

yeah right, States rights was settled at point of a gun in 1856. Go ahead and try to leave without sending a check to DC. Ask South Carolina how that worked out.

Darkace911

MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Faust7]

If Microsoft don't come up with a solution that the EU finds acceptable, then they can be fined $5m a day.

I have no illusions that Microsoft would actually pay that - it's an exorbitant amount.

The worst punishment the EU can mete out is to bar Microsoft from doing business in participating countries.

If/when that happens, what will European Average Joe consumer reaction be?

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Ashtead]

Barring MS from the EU might make too much trouble for each country.

One thing that might happen, however, is enforced free licensing of the MS patents that, according to the article, MS claim would be infringed otherwise. Along with forced disclosure of the interfaces, and probably some guarantees that this openness would be preserved in future revisions.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[0x461FAB0BD7D2]

what will European Average Joe consumer reaction be?

Sacre bleu!

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[rokzy]

>If/when that happens, what will European Average Joe consumer reaction be?

something like trying to shout "aaaaaahahahahahahahahhaaaaa", and "yeeeessssssssss!!!" at the same time, leading to a kind of choking sound.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[sweatyboatman]

Should the EU block MS from selling their OSes, you can bet that the commodity machine market will quickly switch over to alternative OSes.

What's missing in wide-scale adoption of linux is a large commitment by retailers to sell and support Linux-based systems.

The average user doesn't care if he/she's running windows or linux or OSX or Commodore64. They don't care if their browser is IE or Mozilla. They just want the computer to provide the tools they need.

If they can browse the web, send emails, upload photos from their camera, and open files from work they'll be happy.

In the short-run, there might be some headaches for consumers. But in the long-run the result would be a huge install base for linux/OSX.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[yabos]

That could be the best thing to happen in a while. People will have to get non MS stuff and realize it's better.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[DrEldarion]

If/when that happens, what will European Average Joe consumer reaction be?

Probably not much of anything until they start buying new computers, and find (much to their dismay) that none of their old software works, that it's MUCH harder to find new software, and that they can't play most games anymore. Then they'd probably be mad at the government.

The average consumer doesn't care about "open source" or "licensing". All they care about is "will my computer run what I want it to?".

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Hieronymus Howard]

The worst punishment the EU can mete out is to bar Microsoft from doing business in participating countries.

That would probably hurt them as much as the $5 million a day fine. The EU probably accounts for nearly half of Microsoft's market, if not more.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[IWantMoreSpamPlease]

...If/when that happens, what will European Average Joe consumer reaction be?...

If the EU phrases the edict correctly ("We are punishing Microsoft because they will not adhere to principles, and do not have the best interests in mind for developers), then the reaction will be a positive one, and might encourage a switch to another platform, where support for said platform is implied by the EU gov't.

If phrased badly, well then, there's liable to be a riot in the streets.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[sgtrock]

I have no illusions that Microsoft will pay that fine. While it's not exactly chump change, it still isn't enough to dissuade them from moving forward, as they can still easily show a profit.

Don't kid yourself, this really is a small fine for a company the size of Microsoft. For all companies, small fines are just the cost of doing business. They'll just raise the price of some of the products elsewhere to cover the loss in profit.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Jdodge99]

Simple solution -- deny them all enforcement rights for IP violations. Basically tell europe -- Microsoft won't play by the rules, fine: we won't enforce the rules for them -- go ahead and copy their software. Basically treat them like a terrorist nation -- they lose certain "sovereign" rights.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[mpe]

Don't kid yourself, this really is a small fine for a company the size of Microsoft. For all companies, small fines are just the cost of doing business. They'll just raise the price of some of the products elsewhere to cover the loss in profit.

This is especially a problem with fining a monopoly. Since with their monopoly intact the only level of fines which would be an issue are those large enough to cause immediate cash flow problems.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Gorath99]

If Microsoft don't come up with a solution that the EU finds acceptable, then they can be fined $5m a day.

I have no illusions that Microsoft would actually pay that - it's an exorbitant amount.

The worst punishment the EU can mete out is to bar Microsoft from doing business in participating countries.

If/when that happens, what will European Average Joe consumer reaction be?

Why do so many people think that multinationals can get away with anything? (Please don't take this as a personal attack. I'm genuinely amazed.)

Assets can be seized, managers who willfully make a company dodge the law can be held personally accountable, government money can be spend differenly, government advisories can recommend against using their products, etc., etc. None of these things prevent MS from doing business in the EU.

Sure, hypothetically MS might decide to withdraw from the EU at all, but I bet their investors would be none too happy about that. And it would be even worse for their reputation. Who would ever want to do business with a company that can just decide to effectively disappear? Who's to say they wouldn't pull the same stunt in other regions? Doing such a thing is guaranteed to make to world pay serious attention to open source and that's the very last thing MS wants.

If the EU is genuinely pissed, MS had better pay attention. They've simply got too much to lose. Sure, they can stall and try to get a better deal and they might even get away with it, but the one thing they can't do is pretend they're untouchable, because they're not.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Da Fokka]

You can... like... buy software?

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Dutchmaan]

Don't kid yourself, this really is a small fine for a company the size of Microsoft. For all companies, small fines are just the cost of doing business. They'll just raise the price of some of the products elsewhere to cover the loss in profit.

$5 million a day equates to over $1.8 billion a year.. even for MS, $1.8B annually is more than just a cost of doing buiness.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Vince Mo'aluka]

If/when that happens, what will European Average Joe consumer reaction be?

Stay the hell out of my business, I'd guess.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[gl4ss]

they don't need to pay. eu can just TAKE the money from microsoft. besides than that, they will pay - after all, they want to make more money in europe.

ms's fine wasn't that big either when you know the fines that eu has smacked on some cartels before.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Anonymous Coward]

I think its because it rarely, if ever, happens in their experience, that a large company is held accountable for their mis-deeds.

In the US, the government is owned by the corporations. They are used as a competitive tool, funneling tax money in, keeping smaller competitors down, and forcing other countries to comply with the status quo.

That's why, in the rare instances when a company is held accountable for their actions, they make a TV movie about it.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Max Threshold]

Why do so many people think that multinationals can get away with anything? (Please don't take this as a personal attack. I'm genuinely amazed.)

Because here in the U.S., they basically can.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[murdochrjj]

Typical USAian (I won't say American because America is a continent) viewpoint. Eventually the kids get sick and tired of the overgrown bully who picks up his ball and refuses to let anyone play with it. When that happens there is no way back. Ever. Linux is a pefectly suitable replacement for windows. If the european companies who buy windows put a fraction of that money into KDE, problem resolved.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[hazah]

that it's MUCH harder to find new software"

Have you been online lately?

The average consumer doesn't care about "open source"

Are you sure about that? As far as I know, the average joe just can't afford to pay $300/licence every time he needs the computer to perform a new logical function. The average joe is more likely to figure "hey, I bought this magic box, this screen box, this wire. I pay for my cable... so where's that interweb??"

Software, is what the average joe does not care about. No matter how wonderful and magical it is to know about it, they just don't want to deal with software. Hence, it's becoming more and more of an issue to sell it. Hence the popularity of GPL'd, BSD'd style systems. Even Apple is able to charge for it without much criticism.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[worldthinker]

What on earth makes you think Microsoft pays any significant amount of taxes? Yes it pays some but given the very generous R&D tax credits and abatements, as well as other tax loopholes, it doesn't pay all that much. Certainly not so much that the US Army would notice...

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[iBod]

>>Why do so many people think that multinationals can get away with anything?

I dunno either.

It seems to be the norm here to imagine that MS has grown into some sort of malignant, unstoppable colossus with infinitely deep pockets.

MS is just a corporation - not the antichrist! It does what it can get away with to further its own interests over and above everyone elses (see Capitalism).

To many Slashdotters, it seems MS has become the ultimate bogeyman. It haunts their every nightmare and they feel that governments of sovereign nations should quake in their boots at the dreaded might of MS (or whoever). It's utter bullshit.

Perhaps some here need to read up a little on world economics, trade and politics to get some kind of actual perspective on this issue.

Personally, I don't think Bill Gates lies in bed at night wondering how to strike a blow for corporate might against the EU. Nor do I imagine the EU leaders looking under their beds for Bogey Bill!

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[ediron2]

Sure, hypothetically MS might decide to withdraw from the EU...

Did anyone else read this and go "Whoa, I knew microsoft was huge, but when were they made an EU member!?"

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[DrEldarion]

Have you been online lately?

Remember, we're talking about your average clueless user here. Most people wouldn't have any idea about where to look online for software. They think that everything comes from a box at CompUSA/Best Buy/Circuit City/etc.

These are people that think "downloading" is installing a program from a CD.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[SpecBear]

There are far worse things the EU could do. A few suggestions:

-Since Microsoft refuses to abide by EU laws, declare that the EU will not enforce any of MS' patents or copyrights.
-Freeze and seize any MS assets in the EU.
-Issue warrants for the arrest of top MS executives. No more European vacations for Gates.

The EU still has plenty of options, should it have the guts to act upon them. I think holding company officers personally responsible for legal noncompliance is a big step. Losing millions and millions of money that isn't really theirs isn't nearly as frightening for the people running a massively profitable corporation.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[MightyMartian]

At the same time, MS is an abusive monopoly, and only the EU right now seems terribly interested in clipping its wings.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Em Adespoton]

I severely doubt there are any CompUSA/Best Buy/Circuit City stores in the EU. You might just find that "Average Georges" isn't quite the same person as "Average Joe".

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[penguinoid]

No, if the EU decides to ban Microsoft it will implement the ban after a reasonable time frame. Within that time, thousands of previously MS-only software companies will provide linux/mac verisions of their software. All the major games/other software will be ported. I mean, you really don't want to miss out on half the software sales in the world. Sure, lots of things won't be ported, but lots of things will.

Anyways, this is all moot because microsoft would never annoy the EU enough to get banned.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[bar-agent]

I too disagree that Microsoft would ever pay a $5m/day fine. Politicians are far cheaper than that.

"Never blackmail for more than what it costs to have you killed."

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[AnotherBlackHat]

The worst punishment the EU can mete out is to bar Microsoft from doing business in participating countries.

That's the worst you can think of?

They could declare Microsoft an unacceptable corporation and seize all their european assets.

They could stop providing copyright protection for
MS products, essentially making pirating MS software legal.

They could deport, detain, or kill Microsoft executives.

Sure, they're not likely to do any of those things, but it would be a huge mistake to assume that a government isn't capable of them.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[sgtrock]

Nope, it's only 5% of revenue. They won't even blink an eye at it. Not when giving in means FINALLY having to give up on one of the key ways that they keep people locked in to their crap.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[Alsee]

in the rare instances when a company is held accountable for their actions, they make a TV movie about it.

I hope to be watching a freaking miniseries on Microsoft this time next year.

-

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[bluGill]

For the first year or two you are correct. However within a few years Europe will adapt. Companies will start writing games for linux/OSX. (I make no claims to know which will dominate. Whichever dominates will get the games.) The EU is a large market. Large enough that if nobody else in the world cares to write software for non-Windows they can write what they need themselves, and they would have the incentive.

Don't overlook Wine and ReactOS in there. Either could make a difference too. (The latter assuming they become stable enough to run, if it runs at all they are likely to get a lot of installs just because they run Windows apps.)

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[bluGill]

Europe can't. They have signed various treaties with the US to enforce all US copyrights.

Re:MS won't pay the fine - just watch.

[hazah]

I would really, really, really hate to see that as the average.

Why do you have such a negative view in the first place?

Let me ask you, is reading this post a hard to come by comodity for you?

Repeat after me, "there are no types of people".

Fines and Microsoft.

[Noryungi]

As a reminder, Microsoft makes up to $ 1 billion of profit per month according to Cringely.

$ 5m per day is something like $ 1.8 billion dollars per year. So, it hurts bad, but it's still something Microsoft can afford.

This being said, the EU could also decide to slowly raise the fines over time. That would probably make Microsoft move. I just hope they are not going to introduce Windows XP Starter Edition in Europe... Scratch that, I hope MS is going to do just that, since that would make many europeans switch to Linux.

Re:Fines and Microsoft.

[HTL2001]

according to the article, the fine is 5% of daily earnings (about 100m a day) so as their profit increases, so does the fine

Re:Fines and Microsoft.

[tokul]

$ 5m per day is something like $ 1.8 billion dollars per year. So, it hurts bad, but it's still something Microsoft can afford.

They can't afford it. If EU gets 5M a day, other countries might ask for something too.

Re:Pot calling Kettle Black

[InfiniteWisdom]

Its the law of the land. No one is forcing MS to do business in the EU

Patience

[Necrotica]

Why do so many governments show so much patience with a company already convicted of a crime? $5 million a day? Ha! Everyone knows that's not going to hurt Microsoft. Make it $100 million dollars per day and we'll see results.

Judges and governments alike should yell "ENOUGH ALREADY!" and enforce the laws to the limit. Period. This is ridiculous.

Re:Patience

[flumps]

Just so as we are clear, the EU is more of a governing body or confederation, not a government. Most people (esp. in the UK) think that most EU politicians sit on their behinds making up laws nobody needs or wants (such as the standard length of bananas). However to be fair we do tend to jump to the EU especially when it comes to Human Rights.

Quite frankly tho, IMHO Microsoft will have more problems with this than just owing cash. I believe they have a reputation to uphold, and that is worth more than $5 million dollars a day.

Re:Patience

[mpe]

Why do so many governments show so much patience with a company already convicted of a crime?

Actually one convicted more than once.

Judges and governments alike should yell "ENOUGH ALREADY!" and enforce the laws to the limit.

It's the difference between how the law treats "corporate people" and "real people". When it comes to the former there appears to be no concept of "bail" or "remanded in custody".

Re:Patience

[KarmaMB84]

It's not legal to force women into prostitution in the US. That's more than I can say for the German unemployment system.

What's wrong with EU?

[TeeJayHoward]

I really don't understand. Microsoft created a product. They're under no obligation to release any information about that product to anyone. This is the equivilent of Joe Blow's newfangled Linux distro being released and Joe Blow being sued because he's not providing free tech support. If you don't like it, DON'T USE IT! Nobody is forcing you to use a Microsoft operating system. Yes, they've got some nasty business practices. Freedom of choice: Does it mean nothing anymore?

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[smashin234]

Normally you would be right, that MS should not be forced to give up trade secrets or patents, etc., but if you look at the facts of the case, it is not what it appears.

See, it works like this, MS is a vertical monopoly, and therefore they also develop software for their OS. If they use their superior position in the OS arena to help build their own applications, they are abusing their monopoly vertically.

That means, that if they use hidden or secret procedure calls, etc. to give their software an advantage, they are abusing their monopoly and therefore should be punished for it.

Remember, its not illegal to have a monopoly, but it is illegal to abuse that position.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[silas_moeckel]

Your still free to choose. The EU is not a fully capitalist system they do not like monopolies and have decided to put some checks in there power. Thats what governments do. MS does not have to do business in those nations but if it does it has to play by there rules. Governments are not people they are not clients they can change the rules in the middle and get away with it. They shold be the ballance to corperate greed, after all MS does not have it's own army yet.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Nakarti]

Me? Being forced to use Microsoft Windows? No.
I am not, because I build my own computers.

Millions of others who don't know how to build a computer and aren't willing to go to some small builder for them being forced to use(or at least buy) Microsoft Windows? Yes.
Think I'm lying? Try to get a Linux home PC(or laptop) from Dell, HP, Toshiba, or Gateway.

It's known as the "Microsoft Tax" for a reason.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[anti-pop-frustration]

You've never heard of these things called antitrust laws or coercive monopoly have you ?

Yes, they've got some nasty business practices. Freedom of choice: Does it mean nothing anymore?

Yes, because we all know how much microsoft stands for "Freedom of choice".

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[quarkscat]

Indeed, what IS wrong with the EU?

The EU as a government entity has the right to
require that software they purchase meet certain
terms and conditions, including interoperability.
MSFT's response regarding the publishing of their
API's and specification by way of an encumbered
AND expensive license violates the EU's stated
requirements. Nothing more.

What I DO find rather interesting is the stance
the EU has taken in regard to MSFT's monopolistic
ploy, versus the EU's apparent infatuation with
the adoption of software patents. There would
appear to be a disconnect between these two
conflicting mindsets. So now I am confused...

As far as the penalty of $5 Million per day fine
is concerned, any judiciary anywhere in the West
would/should consider the penalty appropriate to
weighed benefit of ignoring a judgement. The
"carrot" for MSFT is continued access to the EU
marketplace, so the "stick" should be big enough
to balance the scales. Court rooms in the USA
do this all the time when considering the posting
of bond to offset a defendant's "flight risk".

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Karn]

You would have a point if Microsoft had acheived its market dominance on good products alone, but the fact is that they got where they for the most part by using nasty (and illegal) business practices. And since they acheived their dominance partly by disregarding the law, it is only fair that they be smacked down by it.

You Microsoft apologists need to understand that nobody forced Microsoft to be anti-competetive to the point that they actually broke the law. They have noone to blame but themselves for the hot water they're in. You are talking about consumer's choice to not buy an OS at the expense of not being able to run independant software that was written explicitly for Windows for no other reason that "that's what everyone is using" (relatively unreasonable), but what about a company's choice to focus on products and quality and not on absolute market domination (reasonable)?

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[rdc_uk]

"What I DO find rather interesting is the stance
the EU has taken in regard to MSFT's monopolistic
ploy, versus the EU's apparent infatuation with
the adoption of software patents. There would
appear to be a disconnect between these two
conflicting mindsets. So now I am confused..."

You would likely be far less confused if you remembered to think of "the EU" as not a single entity, with a conciousness of its own.

Different people, who work in different parts of "the EU", have different minds. And therefore can take different attitudes to the same thing (let alone different attitudes to different things) This is fairly basic "nature of reality" stuff; surely its not really beyond you?

I believe the patent issue was a European Parliament issue, and the monopoly issue is a European Commission issue - they are different entities, therefore unlikely to directly share any personnel. Threfore unlikely to present a singular attitude on any single issue, let alone two separate issues.

Add to that the fact that the patents issue was related to a lobbying/corrupting faction, and their paid-for stooges attempting to bypass the European Parliament, rather than representing the corporate (as in corporate entity, not "business") attitude of the European Union as a whole.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Anonym0us Cow Herd]

I really don't understand. Microsoft created a product. They're under no obligation to release any information about that product to anyone.

Microsoft is a monopoly. Something that Joe Blow is not.

But I could also answer that, similarly, the EU is under no obligation to allow duty free import of Microsoft's non-interoperable products, or for that matter, to even allow the sale of those products at all.

Simply halt the sales of all non-interoperable Microsoft software products in the EU.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[megarich]

Freedom of choice: Does it mean nothing anymore?

Wrong argument to portray here. If anything the EU is trying to level the playing field so that WE can have the freedom of choice. M$ is a monopoly, if it werent for governing bodies, they would THWART YOUR FREEDOM OF CHOICE and charge you up the wazoo for their product and impose there will on you, more so than now. Yea what are you going to say? don't use a computer? Too bad it's not that easy in today's society

Think I'm wrong? Study up on your history and look at all those monopolies from the early 1900's and the evils they brought......

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[PhilHibbs]

Unfortunately an entriely free market would lead to Rollerball. We are democratic, and therefore ultimate power resides with the people. Corporations can do business, but under our terms. And that means, "Don't abuse a monopoly position".

Even democracy itself needs to be regulated. Try asking two wolves and a sheep to democratically decide what to have for lunch. Minorities need to be protected from "the tyrrany of the majority", otherwise you end up with concentration camps and gas chambers.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[knight37]

That would just mean the products would still be there and being sold, but the EU couldn't tax it anymore because it's all black market now. Microsoft probably wouldn't be making any money on it either, but essentially this would push Europe over into a situation like we have in Asia.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[SleepyHappyDoc]

Remember, its not illegal to have a monopoly, but it is illegal to abuse that position.

One of these days, some huge corporation will decide to seriously do exactly that (Microsoft suddenly pulling it's products out of Europe entirely, or Monsanto suddenly deciding not to sell herbicide to US farmers, for example), and that day, the balance of power will be shifted forever. If everyone woke up one day with a message on their PC that their Windows XP Home had been deactivated in response to an act by their government, that would also have tremendous political effect, particularly if an election were soon after.

We are way past the point where regulation can stop things, ultimately. We will get to the point where one of these huge companies will just say No, and the world will be changed forever.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Anonym0us Cow Herd]

Or, Microsoft would comply with the court order.

Or not. If not, then maybe the EU is best served by not allowing in, or heavily taxing non-interoperable products. If not, then the court must have been in error trying to enforce interoperability.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[popo]

You said:

"Remember, its not illegal to have a monopoly, but it is illegal to abuse that position".

But there are two major problems with that statement:

1) Microsoft is not a monopoly. They are the best competitor in a multiplayer competitive business arena: And the arena is *not* the software market, it is the OS market.

The problem is that 'software' as we know it is a 'derivative product' -- It uses myriad pre-written features from OS's (like dialog boxes and visual elements, keytrapping, memory management, graphics, etc.) Software creators benefit from the rapid-development environments afforded them by the OS creators, and then turn 180 degrees and point the finger at the OS creator for having an advantage in their home field.

What does this mean? (And here comes the most unpopular thing ever uttered on Slashdot) It means that software as we know it is like making vacuum cleaner bags. Its a support field for the larger more important industry of OS development. The answer is DON'T WRITE SOFTWARE FOR WINDOWS OR OSX.

Want to free software from the shackles of the OS market? Write for a free OS. Linux is the answer. (But don't complain that free software has no marketing budget to acquire new users.)

2) The practice of revealing secret or hidden procedure calls (when done independently we call it "reverse engineering" and its illegal -- when governments do it its apparently ok) would also shatter the iPOD monopoly, the Apple monopoly, the RealNetworks monopoly, and countless other platforms which depend on secure media for their business models.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Sj0]

If you believe there are problems with the EU, you must really hate the US; they have found Microsoft guilty of violations of the law on several occasions and imposed penalties.

The bastards!!

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Sj0]

You forget that countries are actually far more powerful than corporations, but the rule of law and political considerations mean that they play softball.

Microsoft and Monsanto may have the dollars, but the government has the guns and tanks, and if push came to shove, the government would exist, and the corps wouldn't.

I'm not advocating such a thing, naturally!!!!! I'm just pointing out that the balance of power has only shifted in terms of the game played by economists, not the real world where some forces cannot be reasoned with.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Sj0]

Microsoft is not a monopoly. They are the best competitor in a multiplayer competitive business arena: And the arena is *not* the software market, it is the OS market.

No they are not. Linux is not a competitor to Windows in the same way that the local orphanage is not a competitor to the local orphanage. Beyond that, I've used the majority of Microsofts competitors, from DR-DOS to OS/2 Warp to BeOS, and the only thing they all have in common is that they're all dead. The fact that this pathetic volunteer project (no insult meant towards linux users or coders here, try to understand what I mean when I say this) is considered the major competition vs. the mighty Microsoft is indellable proof that the market has failed.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[Sj0]

Remember to buy a quality fabrication plant. Even though you can get one in China for a few dollars, it's always better to go with the fab plant filled with workers who can spell their own name.

Re:What's wrong with EU?

[popo]

By "pathetic volunteer project" are you referring to the multi-billion dollar Linux industry?

That's a good one...

and....

[commo1]

The US Government should follow suit... no pun intended.

Seriously, in the global economy, trade similarities are going to become more and more important, especially with the US economy taking a very important second place to the EU. They will have to comply to trade. The US is no longer the bully hey once were.

Re:and....

[HiThere]

The US is no longer the bully hey once were.

I'm having trouble understanding how you meant that.

OTOH: The US has definitely been doing more bullying recently than during the last 60-70 years, when it faced competition, and anyone too unhappy with it could look elsewhere for support.

OTOH: The US can no longer simply say "If you don't do things our way, we'll let the horrible boogeyman eat you!" So the bullying style has changed, and become more blatant.

The gripping hand is, I can't imagine you meaning the obvious straight-forward meaning with a straight face. But I couldn't hear your "tone of voice", so the comment could have been anywhere between wry and sarcastic.

As for following suit... I suppose that the US could actually enforce the moderate penalties that were meted out, but *that* case can't be retried. Any new suit would need to be based on items not covered in the first suit...not that there aren't plenty to choose from.

Re:and....

[KarmaMB84]

We've still got more ICBMs. We've still got our veto in the UN Security Council. We've still got the largest single economy in the world.

How's the EU's econmy doing per capita by the way?

Re:and....

[Sj0]

ICBMs are the dumbest argument ever. History has shown that.

Of course, who needs history when you have jingostism, right?

Re:and....

[Mr. Flibble]

The US is no longer the bully hey once were.

Cough*Cough*IRAQ*Cough*Cough

Seriously though, on that topic, (the war) those of you whom are interested should read:

Americas Secret War which lays out the facts surrounding the war on terror, the war in the middle east, and how the war in Iraq is really a power play to control all the Middle Eastern countries and their policies. (No, they conclude, it is not about oil, but about control.)

Quite a good read, even if you don't agree with the conclusions.

Cough Cough *commissioner* Cough

[ites]

These fines are being levied by the same EU Commission that is forcing through changes in EU patent law designed to allow companies like Microsoft to profit handsomely? Which EU commission shows all signs of being... how can I put this politely... bribed by Microsoft?

Why do I feel we are watching a made-for-public-viewing spectacle that will ultimately result in a trivial fine being paid and the continuation of business as usual?

Re:Cough Cough *commissioner* Cough

[Colm Buckley]

These fines are being levied by the same EU Commission that is forcing through changes in EU patent law designed to allow companies like Microsoft to profit handsomely?

You're getting your EU institutions mixed up. The "forcing through" of the Directive on Patents is apparently being done by the Presidency of the European Council, not by the Commission. However, the incredibly maladroit handling of the issue by both Council and Commission has enraged the European Parliament; they gave Commissioner McCreevy a thorough roasting at a hearing last week, and there is a very real probability that the directive in question will be rejected, or amended back to its former state (very good - basically completely outlaws software patents) by the Parliament. See here for a good summary, with links.

Re:Cough Cough *commissioner* Cough

[HiThere]

I wish I could be that optimistic. I was a week or so ago, but since then my trust in the EU has nosedived. Not quite out of control yet, but even if the EU Parliment rejects the bill it will be touch and go.

Re:Cough Cough *commissioner* Cough

[ites]

My apologies for mixing up the EU institutions. And thanks for the kde.ie summary - it has a very nice briefing.

Re:Cough Cough *commissioner* Cough

[Vitriol Angst]

Yes, it's like rooting for Punch or Judy. This is a sock puppet fight. The same hand is up both sides skirts.

Bill, the particular

[Ganellon]

Bill Gates may be a British knight, but he is not yet emperor of Europe.

I checked on Bill's /. poll response. Evidently, he's not interested in Emporor. He's holding out for Kwisatz Haderach.

Re:Bill, the particular

[Anonymous Coward]

> He's holding out for Kwisatz Haderach.
"640 kByte should be enough for everyone" springs to mind suddenly... so much for his prophetic talents.

Re:Bill, the particular

[HiThere]

Is that the guy that wrote "The road ahead"?

It's simpler, really

[Moraelin]

No, the EU didn't say MS had to GPL any program of their own. The EU just said they had to license their protocols and APIs to everyone, in a non-discriminating way.

Again, this doesn't mean that Windows had to be suddenly GPLed, but that the APIs should be available to _anyone_ who wants to write a program for Windows. Hardly an unreasonable demand, don't you think?

Well, MS basically thought it was smart and slapped a license on those protocols and APIs that basically said you can't share that info with anyone, or show your code to anyone. Basically a legalese way of saying "ok, but you can't use those specs in an OSS program."

Which basically already places a rather unreasonable restriction, when the whole idea in the first place was to make that info available to everyone.

Re:It's simpler, really

[fitten]

Technically, it is available to anyone, or any group, willing to pay the licensing fee. I think the EU is overstepping its bounds by requiring the information to be completely public. They are basically pandering to their own OSS projects and pushing their own agenda. They obviously want the APIs to be open so that they can fund OSS groups to compete with Microsoft. It's an understandable line of thinking, but that doesn't make it not based on some agenda that benefits their own businesses (which, of course, is a natural thing for them to do).

The next step for the EU is simply to declare that MS has to release all of its source for the OS into GPL licensing to close the deal. Since they are a legal body, they could simply declare that Microsoft has to go completely GPL or they can't sell Windows in Europe anymore... what could anyone then do about that?

Re:It's simpler, really

[oscartheduck]

BS. Plain and simple. The EU said that everything had to be compatiblewith the various licenses out there; if it is only available under a CLOSED SOURCE license then various free and open source projects are stymied. The EU, I believe, has no real interest in whether Windows is released under a proprietary license or no, it just wants other projects to be able to be compatible if they choose.

Re:It's simpler, really

[NutscrapeSucks]

The GPL is incompatible with patent licences, not visa-versa.

The only way to satisfy the GPL is to essentially give the patent away, which goes way beyond "non-discriminatory". ("We have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all.")

There's many "OSS" licences that are designed to accommodate software patents, so I don't think you can say this discriminates against open source programmers. You could even just use the BSD licence which makes the patent the end-user's problem.

Re:It's simpler, really

[Silver Sloth]

I honestly think you're misunderstanding the rationale behind the EU decision. They don't have their own OSS projects. They're just passing the same sort of judgement on MS as the US did and then enforcing it. If MS wants to trad in the EU they must play by EU rules. If they break the law they should be punished.

Re:It's simpler, really

[Zemran]

It is has restrictions on the license that do not comply with the spirit of the ruling. To me it sounds very much like MIcrosoft used American lawyers in a European court. US lawyers will play with the wording but a European court will know that they understood what was meant regardless of the words that used and that they are treating the court with contempt. Something that is frowned upon.

Your final point is more of a troll as there is nothing to suggest that MS should open up their own OS just that they should not try to control how people connect their own computers together. MS wants to force people to only use MS and that is the abuse of their monopoly. If they do not remedy this the punishment will get worse.

Re:It's simpler, really

[NutscrapeSucks]

Patents transend code, so I don't see how that matters.

Re:It's simpler, really

[MickyJ]

Sorry, far too much use of the word "basically". Please consult a thesaurus for alternatives.

Re:It's simpler, really

[poot_rootbeer]

the whole idea in the first place was to make that info available to everyone.

And Microsoft's proposed license does just that!

They just want to make sure that if you want information about their APIs or protocols, you go directly to the horse's ass^H^H^H mouth to get it. No games of "telephone", where the information passes through several parties and gets just a little more distorted on each hop. No campaigns of deliberate misinformation coming from unofficial sources, no attempt to embrace/extend/extinguish.

Microsoft's license would not benefit the OSS community in the same way that releasing MS source under the GPL would, true. But the EU's directive doesn't exist solely for the benefit of the OSS community. Closed-source developers, even those in direct competition with Microsoft, have a lot to gain from the arrangement.

Re:It's simpler, really

[MysteriousPreacher]

This could be an interesting cultural difference. I'm not an expert but as I understand it, financial legislation in the US tends be more 'letter of the law', which can can lead to organisations looking for loopholes. I believe British financial legislation tends to be more 'the spirit of the law'. I prefer the second since it leaves less scope for abuse. Of course, it can leave the fine-point a bit open to interpretation but generally, the laws should be easier to understand.

it's like comparing these two.

"You cannot, either by use of a weapon or otherwise, cause the legal termination of a persons life."

"Don't murder people. It's bad."

Re:It's simpler, really

[HiThere]

It depends on whether the EU eventually decides to allow software patents, and if it does, on what it decides is allowed to be patented.

If API's aren't patentable, then patents don't enter into the equation at all. If the are patentable, then the question of how one complies with the court order emerges. The court order is whatever it is, and if you hold a patent that gets in the way, then the court has ordered you to fix the problem.

Re:It's simpler, really

[KarmaMB84]

It enters into the equation when nothing build using the APIs from the EU can be imported into any market where the patents are valid.

Re:It's simpler, really

[mattyrobinson69]

it wouldn't suprise me if microsoft's source code looked more spaghettified perl than typical examples of C or whatever language they do use.

Re:It's simpler, really

[Phisbut]

the whole idea in the first place was to make that info available to everyone. And Microsoft's proposed license does just that!

No it does not. I'm an open-source software programmer, therefore the licence is not available to me. If I ever pay for a licence, I will not be allowed to write any open-source software that happens to operate with Microsoft's software because they'll sue my ass out.

It simply is not acceptable.

Re:It's simpler, really

[ckaminski]

What does assisted suicide have to do with murder? What else could legal termination of a persons life be? Abortion, maybe?

Did you mean illegal termination?

Re:It's simpler, really

[weicco]

So you are saying that if you don't know every god damn API in Windows, you can't write software? For crying out loud browse to msdn.microsoft.org or choose different OS like Linux where everything is so open.

Re:It's simpler, really

[MysteriousPreacher]

Sorry, my typo. Yep, I meant to say illegal termination.

Heh heh, some argue that assisted suicide is murder. I suppose it depends on whether it is a doctor doing it or the local loan shark helping you to fall off a bridge.

Re:It's simpler, really

[HiThere]

That might affect you. I don't think an EU court would notice that, however. At least not officially.

Re:It's simpler, really

[fitten]

it just wants other projects to be able to be compatible if they choose.

Why does it care? Why can't the marketplace settle the issue? What other projects? If they don't like Word, use something else and don't deal with Word formats, for example. Why do they have to be compatible?

And... under a closed source license, an OSS project CAN link to a binary-only library (stripped if necessary) to include the functionality into their code. Nothing would prevent this. There is no *need* for anyone to see the code as long as the API is open and available in some form (by paying for it). All Microsoft has to do is provide a DLL and/or so for the API. Why does it have to be "OSS Compatible". What does that even mean?

Re:It's simpler, really

[bbc]

By what kind of right can APIs be burdened that you need to license them? Or put differently: using which law would Microsoft go after me if I used the API, but did not pay the license?

Re:It's simpler, really

[NutscrapeSucks]

If the EU doesn't care about patents, why are they forcing Microsoft to licence specs? Is there anything in Windows that's actually secret?

I suspect that the EU patent situation is not as simple as /. makes them to be, and some software patents are valid somewhere.

Re:It's simpler, really

[leecn]

The next step for the EU is simply to declare that MS has to release all of its source for the OS into GPL licensing to close the deal

Do you really think the EU will do that? If so, then you clearly don't know what you are talking about.

MS should play hardball

[anopres]

While I'm not a big fan of M$, I think they can pretty much just get their way. They could just say "Drop the lawsuit, or we stop all supporting and licensing activities in the EU effective tomorrow."

(I'm secretly hoping they do this. Think of the adoption rate of Linux then)

Re:MS should play hardball

[mpe]

While I'm not a big fan of M$, I think they can pretty much just get their way. They could just say "Drop the lawsuit, or we stop all supporting and licensing activities in the EU effective tomorrow."

Which might get the reply "All your assets, within the EU, are frozen as of now. All your software is now public domain."

Re:MS should play hardball

[Hieronymus Howard]

Do you realise how much this would hurt Microsoft? Did you actually know that the EU is a bigger market than the US? There's no way that Microsoft are going to cease activities here. From the CIA world factbook:

Population: US 293,027,571 (July 2004 est), EU 456,285,839 (July 2004 est). So more people who could potentially use their software at home and work.

Internet users: US 159 million (2002), EU 206 million (2004). So there's probably more internet users in the EU, though the US figure is out of date.

GDP: US $10.99 trillion, EU $11.05 trillion (2004 est.) Not much difference there.

Re:MS should play hardball

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

While I'm not a big fan of M$, I think they can pretty much just get their way. They could just say "Drop the lawsuit, or we stop all supporting and licensing activities in the EU effective tomorrow."

Ha! I'd love to see that happen, but there is no chance. The EU has a lot more power than MS right now. First, the EU is half their market, that is an order of magnitude more profit lost than just paying the fine. Second, MS has all sorts of money in European banks, assets in EU countries, patents and copyrights, and people who work for them there. When you attempt to blackmail the people who write the laws and have the police and army where you are, they toss your ass in a small jail cell and take whatever they want. "Hello Mr. MS European Director. Are you going to continue business as usual here or go to jail?"

The EU could just separate MS Europe from MS International and grant all their IP and assets in Europe to this new company. R&D in Europe might slow, but then MS International would have to compete. MS may be run by stubborn pricks, but they are not so stupid as to overtly defy the EU. They will continue with business as usual, delay in the courts, and bribe their way out of this.

Re:MS should play hardball

[forgetmenot]

As Patrick Watson said on the CBC last night:
"You cannot win a battle of Ultimatums against an Institution, They will get their pound of flesh"

Might not be an exact quote but it's close enough.
He was referring to his arrogance against the CBC in his early years but I believe the analogy holds here as well. Microsoft, for all its money and influence, is still the little guy when compared to the whole of the EU. Keep in mind also, that this is Europe and Microsoft is an American entity. At the very least, old world pride will kick in and bitchslap Bill back to Redmond.

Re:MS should play hardball

[KarmaMB84]

That's assuming that countries invested in MS don't tell the EC to piss off and let MS come back in. Having their ability to trade with whoever they want usurped by other members of the EU might get them thinking.

Re:MS should play hardball

[nickco3]

That's assuming that countries invested in MS don't tell the EC to piss off and let MS come back in

No. The EC is an executive body with the power to issue decisions in competition law. The local courts in all member states will enforce its decisions.

When they became members each EU state passed enabling legislation which, amongst much else, instructs local courts that European law takes precedence over national laws. The only way for a member state to avoid their own judges enforcing an EU ruling is to repeal that enabling legislation (i.e. withdraw from the EU.)

Re:MS should play hardball

[anopres]

Yes, but wouldn't it just be a hoot to see everybody squirm?

I can't see how they can be thrown in jail for deciding to no longer support their products in a particular geographical region.

I don't think it would actually get that far anyway. The business community in the EU would go nuts and probably force the issue one way or the other very quickly.

Re:MS should play hardball

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I can't see how they can be thrown in jail for deciding to no longer support their products in a particular geographical region.

If the courts order a person to comply with an order to run the EU branch of MS as a separate business and sever ties with the U.S. home office, you can be certain that a company officer could certainly go to jail for refusing to comply.

I don't think it would actually get that far anyway.

You've got that right. If Ballmer announced he was stopping sales to Europe there would be an emergency meeting of the board of directors and he'd be out on his ass in about an hour. You don't give up on a 25 billion (profit) a year market because a 1.8 billion a year fine is imposed upon you. Anyone whose math is that bad would get the boot in record time.

Re:MS should play hardball

[Art Tatum]

So old world pride will finally be useful for something? *ducks*

Re:WTF

[Spacejock]

I'm not in the UK but they did knight him. Pity they didn't pawn him instead.

Interesting isn't it...

[korielgraculus]

That the EU has the right to demand 5% of GLOBAL revenue, rather than European revenue, especially as the agreement they reached isn't even applicable outside of Europe.

Question for our US cousins, will this 5% be taken out of Microsoft before or after they pay US tazes? And how does it feel to be subsidising European justice?

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[Heian-794]

I don't know if the EU *has* the right to do this. They can attempt to assign this right ot themselves, but surely Microsoft's US, Asian, Aus, etc. lawyers will protest. What if 21 political entities did the same thing as the EU, claiming for themselves 5% of Microsoft's *gross*?

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[jawtheshark]

Interesting? No.... Logical, yes. Multinational companies would just use accounting tricks to divert all revenue to other divisons, making the revenue of the European divsion zero. 5% of zero is... Yup, you got it.

That's the reason: avoid accounting tricks...

before or after they pay US tazes?

Doesn't matter: I don't think Microsoft even pays taxes in the US, but that's other accounting tactics that are at play.

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[Cheerio Boy]

That the EU has the right to demand 5% of GLOBAL revenue, rather than European revenue, especially as the agreement they reached isn't even applicable outside of Europe.

Question for our US cousins, will this 5% be taken out of Microsoft before or after they pay US tazes? And how does it feel to be subsidising European justice?

As one of those "crass Americans" I can say with some certainty that I have no problem with this. After all we shove our laws down the world's throat. It's more than past time that we end up on the receiving end. Karmically speaking that is.

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[mpe]

That the EU has the right to demand 5% of GLOBAL revenue, rather than European revenue, especially as the agreement they reached isn't even applicable outside of Europe.

Because they can apply all sorts of what ammounts to legal "money laundering" to mimimise "European Revenue". e.g. converting all income from Europe into US Dollers as soon as they possibly can.

Question for our US cousins, will this 5% be taken out of Microsoft before or after they pay US tazes?

No doubt Microsoft use whatever tricks they can to avoid paying taxes anywhere they possibly can.

And how does it feel to be subsidising European justice?

If the money collected in fines ends up being used to buy goods or services from the US it may well result in more tax revenue to the US Government.

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[Thu25245]

And how does it feel to be subsidising European justice?

I wouldn't know. I've never given any money to Microsoft.

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[KarmaMB84]

The more I see the more I think we should have nuked Europe BEFORE Japan....

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

And how does it feel to be subsidising European justice?

I feel cheated. I mean we convicted them first, the U.S. government should be collecting 1.8 billion from them annually. Instead of the government getting a funding boost, however, a small fraction went to donations to the Democrats and Republicans, and as a result we saw more ads on TV during the elections. What a rip off.

I guess the europeans just have a better government right now. They went for 1.8 billion in the government coffers instead of a few million in bribes to the politicians. I wonder what they will spend it on that U.S. citizens could have used. Heck we could have started paying off some of our enormous debt.

Re:Interesting isn't it...

[nutshell42]

The EU can fine whatever they want. The law says 5% of global revenue (at least that's what I assume from your post) but they'll be fining the European subsidiaries. The law could also say "5% of the GDP of the Netherlands" or "1.94523 billion Yen" or something else. But when the EU passed that law they thought five percent of the global revenues of a corporation would be fair.

Now as I said they can only fine (or more exactly actually collect the money) parts of the corporation that are conducting business in the EU. If Microsoft wanted to they could let their European subsidiaries go belly up and start new ones (if the financial structure of Microsoft is like I assume it is). But the EU could fine the new ones too, the PR damage of a stunt like that would be a catastrophe worse than even hundreds of millions of dollars so they'll comply (or better: they won't comply less blatantly) or pay

Re:Pot calling Kettle Black

[InfiniteWisdom]

You're making it sound as it the EU arbitrarily decided to start fining MS. There are laws that have been passed through democratic process. MS was tried in a court of law and found guilty of violating those laws. Now they're guilty of failing to abide by the court's ruling. If they want to do business in the EU they need to comply with the law, or they can stop doing business there.

Sovereignty...

[homgran]

Obligatory Bushism. :)

Re:WTF

[ccharles]

I'm not from the UK, but apparently they did.

"Knight Commander of the Most Excellent Order of the British Empire" my ass...

Re:WTF

[pentalive]

He cant be a "knight" because He's not a subject of the crown, they have another title of honor that they give to non-subjects.

Same sort of cerimony though.

Re:WTF

[flumps]

Yep, they .

Shocking, isnt it.

Microsoft Appears to Own the EU

[FreeUser]

The EU won't put up with it since it will dilute their power.

Sure they will. Microsoft bought Ireland cheap, raised their standard of living, and thereby leveraged their influence over the European Union. This has already paid off, and will continue to do so. Take a look at how software patents have been literally shoved down the Europeans' throats, against their will, despite overwhelming votes against them in the token democratic portions of the EU governance regime, despite opposition from most EU members, and despite protocols that required the issue to be handled differently than it was.

If the EU will bend over for software patents, something that is going to wipe out their technology sector almost completely, simply because a couple of big foreign companies (Microsoft and IBM) can buy a small economy outright and throw money around to depress or accelerate other economies, they'll certainly bpw to a (proportionately) minor quibble such as this.

Re:Microsoft Appears to Own the EU

[slavemowgli]

I think you're making a slight mistake if you think of the EU as a "small economy", though.

Re:Microsoft Appears to Own the EU

[FreeUser]

I think you're making a slight mistake if you think of the EU as a "small economy

I was referring to the economy of Ireland, which at the time Microsoft moved in, was "small" in relative terms. It was an easy way for Microsoft to build up one economy, and get a disproportionate amount of influence over the EU as a whole as their return, via Ireland as proxy. The way the software patent issue played out illustrates that point perfectly.

Re:Microsoft Appears to Own the EU

[Colm Buckley]

Er... you are Florian Müller and I claim my five Euro!

Seriously, this notion that Microsoft has "bought" Ireland is totally insulting to me and to a couple of million other Irish people. Sure, Commissioner McCreevy is acting in a Microsoft-friendly manner, but he's far from the only Commissioner to do so - note that the software patents directive in its current form was brought in by the Dutch commissioner who was McCreevy's predecessor. Articles like this aren't actually useful, as they make Ireland the scapegoat for corporate-friendly government policies everywhere. This is nonsense; plenty of right-wing governments support exactly the sort of corporate-friendly policies which the software patents directive represents; and Ireland's is far from alone in this.

Note also that the majority of Ireland's MEPs are opposed to the Directive as it stands - see here for details of the current campaign.

Re:Microsoft Appears to Own the EU

[FreeUser]

Seriously, this notion that Microsoft has "bought" Ireland is totally insulting to me and to a couple of million other Irish people.

Then I think you need to lighten up on your nationalism a little (and yes, this is rich coming from an American).

People have observed on more than one occasion that Microsoft has "bought" the U.S., and I have certainly never felt "personally offended" by it. And what offense I do feel by it I take up with the appropriate parties, ie. the corrupt politicans who have sold out my country to private interests ... not those who have observed and reported the fact.

Microsoft did leverage Ireland to buy influence in the EU, and in many respects they did "buy" the country's government. Do they own everyone in Ireland, or even most people in the Irish government? No, of course not, but they did pump money into the economy and almost single-handedly catalyzed its move from one of the poorest in Europe to one of the richest (in per capita income terms), something they were able to do with a small economy that would have been completely impossible with a larger one (like, say, Italy, Germany, France, Great Britain, etc.). This bought them a great deal of influence in Ireland, which in turn has been leveraged into a very disproportionate influence in Europe.

If you feel insulted by this, I suggest you take it up with your government, not with the messenger. You've been used badly by one of our companies. You should be offended, but not with me.

Re:Pot calling Kettle Black

[JaredOfEuropa]

Why is it ok for a government to plunder MS to the tune of $5 million a day?

If it had been a US antitrust watchdog ordering MS to open up their standards, and a US judge finding that MS was to be fined for non-compliance with the order, I think that a lot more people here would be cheering.

I for one applaud the large fine. I have seen corporations shrug and pay lesser fines, and cheerfully remain in violation of court rulings... especially in antitrust cases. This sends a clear signal to MS to comply now, not after an appeal, not after more tactics to wiggle out of the ruling while appearing to comply, not after more stall tactics.

Yes, and deservedly

[CdBee]

As a businessman he's a shyster, but he has contributed more money personally than many countries do to the fight against poverty and disease.

That deserves recognition. It's just a shame the Queen didn't make better use of her sword after giving him the knighthood....

Not a Fan of MS but...

[Evil W1zard]

MS should not have to open up their code if they do not want to. If the general public in Europe and the government have issue with this then they don't have to use MS products now do they.

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[MeeTra]

sure, and if MS doesn't want to open up their code, they just don't sell any product in EU. (that would be good for a lot of EU companies)

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[SmokeHalo]

They're not being asked to open up their code. They're being asked to provide what amounts to API's. From TFA:

Microsoft agreed to create a server interoperability licence that would allow rival makers of server software to write applications that can "achieve full interoperability" with Windows client and server operating systems on "reasonable and non-discriminatory terms".

The commission is also concerned that open source vendors are "excluded" from the licence agreement. The spokesman said it is only asking Microsoft to provide the protocols necessary to build products that are interoperable with its servers and is not asking for it to reveal its source code.

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[Narchie Troll]

It's not their code, it's protocols. Big difference.

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[Evil W1zard]

Aren't their APIs already available or have they only been given to specific vendors and MS just doesn't want to give them to any new vendors unless they pay a lofty price?

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[mOdQuArK!]

Microsoft doesn't have to sell anything in the EU if they don't want to. If MS shareholders have an issue with this, then they can take it up with the EU governments.

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[UnknowingFool]

MS should not have to open up their code if they do not want to.

From the article, the EU doesn't want MS to release any source code. They wanted MS to release protocols in an nondiscriminatory way. MS sorta complied. They will release the protocols but will charge such a high price that any average Joe Schmo who wanted to write a app that used the protocols could not afford to even look. Also the terms of the license specifically exluded all open source. I think that the license specifically forbids the licensee from discussing the protocols to anyone other than MS.

Imagine if MS created a MSFTP application with a new fangled FTP protocol called MSFTP. The EU doesn't want MS to release the source code. They want MS to release the specifics of the MSFTP protocol so that a developer could use it to work with MSFTP.

Under the current terms of the MS license, the developer would have to pay $10K just to look at the protocol. But they would have to pay upfront. And they couldn't share any information about the protocol. And they have to pay for all MS protocols not just MSFTP.

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[UnknowingFool]

Aren't their APIs already available or have they only been given to specific vendors and MS just doesn't want to give them to any new vendors unless they pay a lofty price?

Not all APIs are freely available and one of the main issues here is the looking price is very lofty. Most of the time, developers get a free look and must pay to actually use. In this case, they have to pay just to look.

Re:Not a Fan of MS but...

[cfavader]

Actually, the people of europe have the inherent right to decide the will of europe. If they believe blindly trusting a monopoly is disadvantagous to them, it is not only their right but also their duty to act on it.

Restricting trade, especially imports, has always been a natural act in a regulated market. Doing this with intellectual property is essentially the modern equivlent.

Balmer and RMS

[cheezemonkhai]

Stick Balmer in a Room with RMS.

Make Balmer listen to RMS until all problems are sorted.

Should take about 30 second, oh or Balmers head may explode. ;)

Re:Balmer and RMS

[Pop69]

"Should take about 30 second, oh or Balmers head may explode. ;)"

Win - Win situation then ?

Re:Balmer and RMS

[Slack3r78]

Michael: You know, Stallman helped Linus in his career.

Kay Adams: Really? How?

Michael: ...Let's listen to this song.

Kay Adams: Please, Michael. Tell me.

Michael: ...Well when Linus was first starting out, he was signed to this contract with a big-band leader. And as his career got better and better he wanted to get out of it. Now, Linus is Stallman's godson. Stallman went to see the bandleader, with a contract for $10,000 to let Linus go, but the bandleader said no. So the next day, RMS went to see the bandleader again, only this time with Eric Raymond. Within an hour, the bandleader signed the release, with a certified check of $1000.

Kay Adams: How did he do that?

Michael: Stallman made him an offer he couldn't refuse.

Kay Adams: What was it?

Michael: Eric Raymond held a gun to his head, and Stallman assured the bandleader, that either his signiture or his brains would be on the contract.

Kay Adams: ...

Michael: ...That's a true story.

[cut to Linus singing again for about 10 more seconds before going back to Michael]

Michael: That's my family Kay, it's not me.

Re:Balmer and RMS

[Just Some Guy]

Question: is RMS singing in this thought experiment? 'cuz I don't think the Geneva Convention would allow that.

Re:Balmer and RMS

[cheezemonkhai]

No
I believe the Free Software Song would be torture in most places in the world.

Re:Balmer and RMS

[iBod]

And picking the beard hairs out of his teeth - ugh :/

Missing mod option you insensitive clods!

[BashDot]

Where's the "+1 Sarcastic" mod?

Seriously though. This is hardly a drop in the bucket for Microsoft.

Re:WTF

[sd4l]

Sorry to break it to you, but it's true http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/3428673.stm Note though, he isn't a Sir as he isn't British... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/3429589.stm

Re:WTF

[boogy nightmare]

Incorrect... Anyone can be Knighted (however non Bitish citzens recieve an 'honourary knighthood')but he is NOT allowed to have the title Sir Bill

In My Best Nelson Voice...

[Foofoobar]

European Union Anti-trust measure? HA HA!

Re:WTF

[soops1966]

Of course we knighted him!

For services to business no less!

'Bout time we ditched the Queen for someone less dotty if you ask me.

Coming from the same government that uses EDS for major contracts, what did you expect?

Re:Woot

[sk8king]

If they bring in no more cash at all. Microsoft is like a whiney kid. If the EU backs down all it will do is teach Microsoft that it [Microsoft] is in charge. The EU has picked this fight and they can't allow Microsoft to win or they will have an even tougher time next time.

Re:If it were up to me...

[TractorBarry]

>...I would force MS to make Office for Linux, WMP for Linux, IE for Linux.

Great. Given their great penchant for allowing every line of their code to operate with full administrator privileges we'll shortly thereafter be able to "enjoy" the wonderful Windows experience on Linux (i.e. spyware, adware, viruses etc.)

So thanks but no thanks. Open Office, Abi Word, Koffice, Rhythmbox, Xine, Totem, Konqueror and Firefox (to name but a few) work just fine already.

Re: Mini Rant

[jawtheshark]

Uhm... A consumer PC goes between 800€ and 1000€ here. That's with monitor and keyboard/mouse. A Mac mini costs about 500€, a keyboard 12€ and a mouse 25€. A 17" Acer TFT costs 260€. Total is: 797€... not much difference between that and a normal x86 consumer PC.

Yeah, indeed a G4 probably can't keep up with a P-IV or an AMD64... *but* to the normal consumer power doesn't matter anymore.

Re:GPL is not the center of all Licenses

[Dav3K]

I was about to mod some posts here, but felt I had to respond to you. I agree with you that the only true competition facing MS happens to be Linux. However, I do not agree that bitching and moaning about Apple's pricing strategy has ANYTHING to do with this topic. Yes, Apple has a great OS. Yes, Apple is currently a niche player. Yes, it is also true that OS X only gives XP competition when reviewed by the critics, and not through market share. Let's not forget that Apple is a hardware company first. It's how they make money.

More to the point, it has absolutely nothing to do with how Microsoft chooses to lose money to the EU.

Office formats

[sicking]

While it's a good thing that the network protocols are being ordered open, I've never understood why this was chosen. Microsoft has a much stronger hold on the desktop then they do on the server because this is where their lock-in tactics have worked much better.

So why not order the office formats to be opened up instead? These formats is what is forcing people to stick with microsoft upgrade through upgrade. If OpenOffice could flawlessly open word and excel documents there is no doubt in my mind that a mixed microsoft/non-microsoft environment would work much better.

Anyone know why the network protocols were targeted? Or if there is any chance that the office formats will be forced open too?

Re:Office formats

[KarmaMB84]

They're opening protocols and APIs. The Office format is neither.

Re:WTF

[pentalive]

Oh. I stand incorrected. I thought I had heard the other. :^)

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft wants to do business in Europe (i.e. it wants the money that Europeans have) therefore they must abide by European laws and legal decisions. Microsoft does not exist purely in the USA, they are also incorporated in many other countries (by their choice), so they explicitly agreed to be bound by the laws of those countries. It's not like they didn't know what they were getting into.

I mean, you couldn't visit the UK and drive on the right-hand side of the road on the assumption that you are only bound by US laws.

Doesn't!

[bahamat]

If Microsoft don't come up with . . .

Doesn't you moron! DOESN'T!

Re:Doesn't!

[rewt66]

You want to be picky? OK. Shouldn't you have a comma in there? Like, "Doesn't, you moron!"

Perhaps you would do better to be civil? Remember that some people post here who do not have English as their first language. (And their English is better than my Spanish or Lithuanian or Swahili, and probably better than yours, too.) So if you're going to correct them, it doesn't hurt to be kind and polite.

Teach, don't mock.

Re:Doesn't!

[Talrias]

Actually, in British English (which is presumably where the submitter is from, being a European-related article), companies are treated as plural, rather than singular - so "Microsoft don't" is grammatically correct.

Chris

Re:WTF

[DataCannibal]

No we did not Knight Bill Gates. Tony Bliar did it.

Yes, yes, yes, I know that strictly speaking the Queen does it on the advice of the PM but we all know how it really works.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Hieronymus Howard]

If I were Bill Gates, I would simply pull all of my product out of Europe and laugh at them.

Yes, but you're not Bill Gates. Microsoft is interested in global domination. As I pointed out in my earlier post, the EU is BIGGER than the US. Why would Microsoft pull out of their biggest market? It would hurt them immensely and their shareholders certainly wouldn't like it.

Re:GPL is not the center of all Licenses

[Anita Coney]

If you agree that the "only true competition facing MS happens to be Linux" then why are you bitching about what I wrote? Clearly you agree that Apple's OSX is not competition to Windows.

I just wanted to explain why I thought Apple was not competition with Windows before the flames started.

Money, money, money is yummy, yummy, yummy.

[Ridgelift]

FTA: "So far, you don't need a licence to write software for Microsoft operating systems."

I don't know why the idea of Microsoft charging people a licensing fee to develop software for Windows never crossed my mind before.

Perhaps Microsoft wants a class-system of software development for their OS. If you want to write simple things, no charge. If you want to make data-related queries to services like Active Directory or hardware, you pay a small licensing fee. If you want to take advantage of the latest and greatest features (especially when Microsoft has a competing product in the area such as Exchange Server) you will pay through the nose.

Re:Money, money, money is yummy, yummy, yummy.

[spectecjr]

I don't know why the idea of Microsoft charging people a licensing fee to develop software for Windows never crossed my mind before.

Probably because Microsoft were historically one of the few software companies who don't charge you to develop on their systems, where all of the others *did*.

Just a thought.

Thought experiment

[hey!]

Imagine two processes. First,you take microsoft, and fine them five million dollars a day. Next you take a pound of lead and let it gradually evaporate vai proton decay.

Q: Which will decay to half of its value first -- the mass of the lead or Microsoft's cash reserves?

Re:Thought experiment

[ckaminski]

well, since that lead will be decaying until the heat death of the universe, and Micrsoft's cash reserves are controlled by the top 51% of Microsoft shareholders who expect to see dividends and ever increasing cash holdings, I imagine that Microsoft will capitulate in the end.

It's just when, and how drawn out the process will be, because MS will resist it in it's entirety.

Re: Mini Rant

[Anita Coney]

"Yeah, indeed a G4 probably can't keep up with a P-IV or an AMD64"

Yeah, thanks for pointing that out. Not only is the Mini over-priced, but it's under-powered too.

Re:NOT **IT'S**

[saihung]

Everyone sing along!

Ooooooh, if it's meant to be possessive,
it's just I*T*S
But if it's meant to be a contraction,
it's I*T*APOSTRAPHE*S
Scallywag!

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Pop69]

Microsoft is also a UK company, companies house in Cardiff says so.

http://wck2.companieshouse.gov.uk/d4557d64d27789d4 2470e8c8d4261826//compdetails

If you're a European company you have to play by European rules.

Personally for all I care you can take your buggy software and go back to you isolationist "nothing exists outside America" policy. I'm sure you and all the other redknecks will be very happy together.

Why does it matter?

[CdBee]

billions of dollars spent on research into vaccines for AIDS will do the same amount of good regardless of the motives of the giver. I don't buy the theory of "dirty money".

Re:Why does it matter?

[Sj0]

There are ethical issues with the idea of buying image, but I suppose the fact that the one doing the selling is a charity doesn't make it any less acceptable than if he had bought a big ad campaign.

I guess you're right.

Re:NOT **IT'S**

[maxwell demon]

Shouldn't that be APOSTR O PHE?

GPL?

[bushidocoder]

IANAL, but I wasn't aware that the terms of the Microsoft settlement required them to open up with a liscense compatible with the GPL. In fact, that seems particularly unfair because although we may disagree with software patents, they are legal in the United States and in the current legal environment, the EU is expected to at least respect those patents, even if they don't observe them.

The GPL allows others to freely extend a system with only the stipulation that the extension must in turn be GPL'd. For systems and protocols invented by Microsoft, the embrace and extend approach is a violation of their core rights to their IP - when Microsoft has done it to other's IP, they got hit hard for it (ala the Java fight), so we shouldn't create a double standard in which Microsoft can't extend but everyone else can.

Microsoft absolutely must publish specifications for communicating with Microsoft systems - the protocols need to be fully documented and freely available to other system makers. But it should be enough that Microsoft releases the protocols under a non-modification open liscense, as long as they do it freely and the protocol description is complete and accurate.

Re:GPL?

[cardpuncher]

You might be able to patent some aspects of a network protocol, but probably very few in this case since there's so much prior art and similarity.

You would certainly be able to copyright an implementation of a network protocol, but no-one is asking Microsoft to provide source code.

Microsoft appears to be wanting to protect "IP" which does not consist of patents or copyright, but "trade secrets".

The EU has decided the "trade secrets" need to be disclosed to prevent an abusive monopoly. Microsoft is attempting to limit the disclosure by placing constraints on the copyrights of the licensees: this affects the licensees rights to do whatever they want with their own code and therefore perpetuates the abuse.

The EU isn't asking Microsoft to give up its patents or copyrights; unfortunately for Microsoft, it doesn't have any real protection for its network protocols other than the current lack of documentation, hence the foot-dragging.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[mpe]

First off, this is NOT meant as flamebait, but, Microsoft is an AMERICAN company. Why should it give one whit what the EU finds, thinks, or wants?

Because if Microsoft wants to do business anywhere they need to obey the law.

If I were Bill Gates, I would simply pull all of my product out of Europe and laugh at them.

It's rather hard to "pull out" a product which has no physical existance.

Due to the market penetration of Windows, the EU would come crawling back, begging for Windows marketing to be reinstated.

Except that Microsoft can't remove all copies of Windows form the EU. They can't stop those copies being copiable. It's also virtually certain that there are plenty of people within the EU who could disable any "copy protection" within a short period of time and/or work out ways to have support requests come from somewhere other than the EU.

My basic point is that, as an American, why should we give a flying flip what the EU wants?!

Similarly why should the rest of the planet care much about what the US happens to think or want.

Re:WTF

[Pop69]

It wasn't me, an old woman did it and ran away

Some numbers for you

[iBod]

Errm...

The EU and US economies are currently about the same (around $11 trillion annual income).

MS and IBM might be big companies but they can't just "throw money around to depress or accelerate other economies", or anything near that.

Do you *really* think MS "bought Ireland cheap, raised their standard of living"?

Ireland's economy alone (annual GDP ~$122 billion) far outstrips MS's annual turnover (~$37 billion).

I think you massively overestimate the power of these corporations. They aren't nation states!

Pot calling the kettle black?

[reality-bytes]

I make the assumtion, of course, that you are American.

Without going to far into the text of your comment, we (in Europe) have generally the same feeling about US litigation which seems to continuously pour beyond your borders.

So my point also would be that "as a European, why should we give a flying flip what the US wants? It's not like they really have any enforcement powers beyond their borders."

(The answer of course, is that if you want to trade overseas, we have to respect the purchasing country/states laws. Either that or everyone trades nationally and our respective economies collapse)

Re: As an american...

[sakshale]

The problem is that the US Government dropped the ball and allowed M$ to continue to act in an illegal manner. Thus the European community has to defend itself against a foreign predator, which is what MicroSoft has become.

If MicroSoft wants to do business in Europe, it needs to obey their laws. Since it has decide to ignore thier laws, Europe has two options.

1 - Punish them through financial fines
2 - Forbid them to do business in Europe

I suspect that, buried somewhere in their laws, their is a third option. Arrest and jail the officers who are instructing the company to break the law. "As and american", would you prefer Knight Gates as Jail Bird Gates?

NTFS read & WRITE in the future?

[teksno]

could this mean that we'll see linux distros with NTFS write in the near future.....

Charles Foster Kane

[IainHere]

Fining Microsoft a few million dollars reminds me of something Orson Welles said as Citizen Kane:


You're right, I did lose a million dollars last year. I expect to lose a million dollars this year. I expect to lose a million dollars next year.

You know, Mr. Thatcher, at the rate of a million dollars a year, I'll have to close this place - in 60 years.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[mOdQuArK!]

If I were Bill Gates, I would simply pull all of my product out of Europe and laugh at them. Due to the market penetration of Windows, the EU would come crawling back, begging for Windows marketing to be reinstated.

Why in the world would the EU find this to be a big problem? Unlike a "real" property (like oil), if Microsoft did something like that, the EU could simply make all Microsoft's products available as public domain. There'd be a lot of EU support vendors who could provide support too.

Companies who depend on intellectual property laws to support their business model must not, under any circumstances, piss off the legislators who write such laws - or they will find out exactly how ephemeral their business model is.

Whereas it's the campaign cash...

[AmazingRuss]

...over here that keep everything legal for MS. Funny how their problems went away after they started donating to political campaigns. We are truly an Ownership Democracy.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[hyphz]

> Due to the market penetration of Windows, the
> EU would come crawling back, begging for
> Windows marketing to be reinstated. Maybe the
> EU needs to be made aware of the fact that not
> all of the world falls under their
> sovereignty.
> My basic point is that, as an American, why
> should we give a flying flip what the EU
> wants?! It's not like they really have any
> enforcement powers beyond their member's
> borders...

Well, no. But if Microsoft did try to pull Windows from Europe, they'd just give Linux a massive base, and convert all the EU software houses. In the extreme case, the EU could simply cancel Microsoft's EU copyright and exclude Windows from the Berne Convention, meaning that pirating it would become legal, as would hacking MS's site from the EU to download patches.

Re: Mini Rant

[jawtheshark]

Depends how you look at it. Considering you get a quality OS instead of a carp one, it might even be under-priced.
As for power: do you really need it for Joe User functions? I can assure you that my mom nor my girlfriend need a P-IV 3.0GHz with Hyperthreading. The equivalent of a P-III is going to be more than enough for them.

Re:WTF

[forgetmenot]

That's "Sir William" to you, peasant.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[S4t0r1]

Not a great move for M$ If you force UE company and individuales to develop windows-less solution rest of the world will follow shortly. M$ simply can't loss europe.

Re:Exploits

[Decaff]

So Let Me ask you this. If Ms releases its network protocols to the public, do you think that will cause even more exploits to be discovered and put the average use at more of a risk to being hacked.

Of course not. Network traffic that is hackable should be put behind firewalls. Opening the protocols simply allows other operating systems and products to use the same protocols as Windows does.

All of the network protocols that Unix/Linux uses are open to the public!

Protect themselves.....

[LinuxBoxRocks]

In a statement, Microsoft also said that it is important to strike a balance between the "private interests of Microsoft" and the "public interests of Commission with respect to implementation of the [antitrust] decision". Isn't that what got them into trouble to begin with?

Re:Bullshit

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Why does an American Company have to be subjected to the fines and penalties of a foreign semi-socialistic union.

Because they are not an American company, they are an International company. When in Rome, obey the Roman laws or pay the consequences. Or do you think North Korean companies should be able to do business in the U.S. but not follow any of our laws while over here?

European companies would not allow such a sanction.

Several European companies have already been given fines nearly as high as this, and they have complied.

If Microsoft is truly a monopoly (and I am not suggesting that it is not), it should be taken up in the United States

It was, then MS bribed the Republican and the Democrats and the Justice department decided their punishment was to have nothing happen to them. Maybe if the U.S. government was not so corrupt the EU would not have to step in. Who elected them again?

The European Union wants to further degrade the U.S. dollar and establish itself as a superpower.

With 5 million a day? Umm, OK then. The U.S. is doing plenty to degrade its own currency. The EU does not need to help out. It's what happens when you put a lying coke addict, who has run several businesses into the ground, and has a vested interest in making money for himself in charge.

Re:Bullshit

[Anonymous Coward]

Microsoft WAS found to be guilty of abusing it's monopoly position in the United States. However, there is one major difference, all the remedies to the court findings got conveniently tossed away when the administration changed back in 2000.

So basically MS was found guilty, but had to do almost nothing as a remedy.

The EU just reaffirmed the same things since the United States in this case didn't have the balls to enforce the findings. Plain and Simple.

Re:Blame the Parents

[oxygene2k2]

in that case, microsoft better settles by abiding the _real_ deal (ie. opening the specs for everyone without silly restrictions) on at least some cases

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[maxwell demon]

I guess MS would be very pleased if the stock "dropped" to 3/2 (=150%) of the current value.

Hidden contributions

[Anders Andersson]

he has contributed more money personally than many countries do to the fight against poverty and disease

And he made that money by selling software to, among others, the very countries that didn't spend as much as him on fighting poverty and disease. Looks like they still contributed to those charitable causes then, albeit indirectly, and may deserve a small portion of that recognition?

I don't mind giving money to charitable causes, nor do I mind others doing business as they see fit, but I'd rather be confident that the money I pay for goods and services go to the production of said goods and services. If not all of it does, then at least those boxes should be labelled "1% of retail price goes to the Red Cross" or whatever, so I can tell when I've done my part.

Not all contributions are of a monetary nature, though. Contributions of new ideas, methods and technologies may be at least as worthy of recognition as a big check, but sometimes a big check may be the only way to make others notice your new idea, method or technology. This may very well be the case also for Bill Gates, and I'm pretty sure I had no part in any such contribution of his. Good for him.

Make the $5millions bite

[PurpleWizard]

By giving it all to a Free Software trust for distribution to major projects that are in competition with anything MS develops.

As soon as they realise that they are paying $1.8 Billions a year to efficient competition they will comply.

Re:Make the $5millions bite

[KarmaMB84]

The WTO doesn't allow fines to be used to fund competition.

Re:Make the $5millions bite

[PurpleWizard]

Do you know where in any relevant WTO agreement I can find that written?

Addendum

[FreeUser]

simply because a couple of big foreign companies (Microsoft and IBM) can buy a small economy outright and throw money around to depress or accelerate other economies,

I obviously didn't make it clear that the "small" economy I was referring to was Ireland in the early-to-mid 1990s, NOT the EU in the early twenty-naughties. MS in some respects essentially "bought" Ireland, and by so doing, bought an imense amount of influence in the EU through Ireland as a proxy. This is born out by Ireland's willingness to sell out the rest of the EU's interesst vis-a-vis software patents at the behest of their own biggest taxpayer, the Microsoft Monopoly in pushing software patents through the EU. Microsoft probably didn't have enough money to have a similiar impact on, say, Denmark, France or Germany's economy, though they can throw enough money around to help or hurt those economies, as they have publicly threatened to do.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[segal_loves_pandas]

First off, this is NOT meant as flamebait, but, Microsoft is an AMERICAN company. Why should it give one whit what the EU finds, thinks, or wants? ... Maybe the EU needs to be made aware of the fact that not all of the world falls under their sovereignty. ... My basic point is that, as an American, why should we give a flying flip what the EU wants?! It's not like they really have any enforcement powers beyond their member's borders...

Normally I believe in a proper argument, critically deconstruct their views, burn their straw men and quote facts to back your corner.

But today I typed "rm *.f" rather than "rm *.o", I'm tired and hung over - so I'll be brief:

You're a fucking moron

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[graphicsguy]

Just imagine the stock os MSFT drop to 3/2 of the current value.

Most people would refer to that as a 50% increase, not a "drop".

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Hakubi_Washu]

Interesting... You automatically assumed I'm German... The US army is stationed all over Europe, you know?

On a side note GDP is not necessarily the best way to express a value for "economy", which is why I
a) used such a fuzzy term and
b) included the "not necessarily beat" snippet.

Oh, and please, go talk to your politicians how we will have to sort things out ourselves next time we start some shit, because personally I think the world would be far less war-torn if the US adopted that point of view and such problems could actually be discussed by the UN (It is their official (read: as undersigned by all members, e.g. countries) job, after all...)

an in Europe...

[Trepidity]

...the government and corporations are the same people!

(See: Silvio Berlusconi)

Re:an in Europe...

[Tim C]

Bush has large oil interests and a number of close friends with large oil interests, doesn't he?

Re:Bullshit

[oxygene2k2]

because european companies are subjected to US fines, too, if they do business in the US and violate american laws - it's normal, and it's good that way, otherwise all those companies would incorporate on some pacific island without any law and export to all other countries avoiding the rules the local economy has to abide to.

oh, and btw. the EU fines european companies all the time, it just happens that we don't have a high-profile monopolist who breaks the rules in software business over here, so you probably just didn't notice it.

Re:Pot calling Kettle Black

[MysteriousPreacher]

Hi, you might remember me from emails such as URGENT ASSISTANCE NEEDED.

As the benevolent dicator of Elbonia, why do the people bother me with these election things. Can't they just leave me to get on with my business?

Probably because it's the law. No-one is forced to use the electricity company but then, if the electricity company do everything they can to block competition, what choice do you have?

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Meumeu]

todays is down to 70%

Just a question: where did you get this? The EU and the US's GDPs are both circa $11 trillion.

Unless you reform your idiotic system you will simply fade away and your place will be taken by the likes of India or even China.

Because we all know the US has nothing to fear from outsourcing...

We tried. But then all these fucking German Unions and politicials started cryign that we would end up killing local enonomy.

I don't know how many soldiers there are in Germany, but I doubt that would make any difference.

Next time you nazi fuckers start some shit in Europe, you will have to sort it out yourself.

It seems you are closer to a nazi government than Germany is.

Re:Pot calling Kettle Black

[PurpleWizard]

It's one of those instances where it would be good to see heads of the company thrown in prison for 6 months as punishment for contempt of court.

After all in England (UK in fact) we even do that to parents who allow their children to play truant and the directors failing blatantly to comply must surely be a more serious offence.

Multinationals which use windows

[grahamsz]

Don't forget there are huge group of multinationals that use windows.

If windows were to become unavaible in the EU then they'd be forced to run some alternative on a significant portion of their desktops.

Once you've figured out how to deploy said alternative, and since the per seat cost of switching is comparatively low, and you may as well extend it to the entire enterprise.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[nmos]

If I were Bill Gates, I would simply pull all of my product out of Europe and laugh at them. Due to the market penetration of Windows, the EU would come crawling back, begging for Windows marketing to be reinstated.

That's EXACTLY why the EU needs to stick to their guns. Any company with that kind of power needs to be watched very carefully.

Sure they do

[jimbro2k]

"after all MS does not have it's own army yet."

Sure they do.
Here's their web address:

Microsoft's Army

Re:WTF

[MemoryDragon]

Actually technically spoken, the weird old lady is not really german, not more than the average french or english is... Her family was german two generations ago, and some other relatives still are, but she is not. Those are typical family stories of every european family...

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Einherjer]

>> Why should it give one whit what the EU finds, thinks, or wants?

Because a global law cares:

"United Nations Convention on Contracts for the International Sale of Goods"

And yes, you are obliged to it.

You need the Washington Post!

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

The Washington Post runs an entertaining "new words by adding/removing/changing one letter" competition from time to time as part of its "Style Invitation" series. Some recent favourites included:

bozone, n. The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. The bozone layer, unfortunately, shows little sign of breaking down in the near future.

foreploy, n. Any misrepresentation about yourself for the purpose of getting laid.

and of course this particular speciality of Slashdot moderators:

sarchasm, n. The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.

"And foreign counterparts"

[tepples]

The closest thing to a constitution in many European countries, starting with the Magna Carta on down, often preserves rights similar to those preserved by the first ten amendments to the U.S. Constitution. Thus, "Fifth Amendment" was likely intended to read "Fifth Amendment and foreign counterparts."

Countries' rates...

[MyLongNickName]

Denmark's 2003 unemployment was 6.6%. Finland's 2003 unemploymen was 9%. Did not check the other countries' rates. Could someone with more time check this out?

Re:Countries' rates...

[KarmaMB84]

Some of the largest ones do in fact have double digit unemployment. Finland is damn close as it is.

Re:Countries' rates...

[a whoabot]

Unemployment in Scandinavia by Country, according to the CIA world factbook. Finland, Greenland and Iceland included as they're all at various times and places considered Scandinavian, at least that's what Wikipedia told me.

Sweden: 4.9% (2003 estimate)
Norway: 4.7% (2003 est.)
Denmark: 6.1% (2003)
Finland: 9% (2003 est.)
Iceland: 3.4% (2003 est.)
Greenland: 10% (2000 est.)

For comparison:

United States: 6% (2003)
United Kingdom: 5% (2003 est.)
Canada: 7.8% (2003 est.)
France: 9.7% (2003 est.)
Germany: 10.5% (2003 est.)
Netherlands: 3.7% (2003 est.)
Switzerland: 3.7% (2003 est.)

This link says that the European Union's unemployment rate as a whole is 8%. They report various numbers differently than the CIA world factbook, such as reporting Denmark's rate as "below 5 per cent." They also say:

"Still, there is however no obvious relationship between the degree of social protection and the unemployment rate today. For example, the Netherlands has returned to low unemployment while continuing to offer high social protection. Scandinavian countries have maintained both high social protection and a low natural rate of unemployment."

Re:Countries' rates...

[AaronGTurner]

"United Kingdom: 5% (2003 est.)" Now down to approx 3% officially, AFAIK. Also officially Germany is up to 11.6%, but it changed its reporting methods, and by the old methods is would be still be nearer 10%. In any case the ILO would be a better source of figures as the ILO calculates them on a more consistent set of criteria. Also high unemployment, whilst bad in some ways for a country, is potentially good for business as it tends to depress increases in wages. So currently we see labour costs rising in the USA but in Germany they are essentially static. In terms of GDP PPP production per capita per hour worked Germany outstrips the USA, but there are more hours worked in the USA due to longer worker hours and lower unemployment. In both countries productivity is improving. What the longer term trend will be (will US productivity gains outstrip increasing producer prices?) I don't know. Currently Germany is the world's largest exporter, although the relatively low value of the dollar may mean that the USA and Germany may swap places yet again before the end of the year.

Re:Countries' rates...

[AaronGTurner]

"United Kingdom: 5% (2003 est.)"

Now down to approx 3% officially, AFAIK.

Also officially Germany is up to 11.6%, but it changed its reporting methods, and by the old methods is would be still be nearer 10%.

In any case the ILO would be a better source of figures as the ILO calculates them on a more consistent set of criteria.

Also high unemployment, whilst bad in some ways for a country, is potentially good for business as it tends to depress increases in wages. So currently we see labour costs rising in the USA but in Germany they are essentially static. In terms of GDP PPP production per capita per hour worked Germany outstrips the USA, but there are more hours worked in the USA due to longer worker hours and lower unemployment. In both countries productivity is improving. What the longer term trend will be (will US productivity gains outstrip increasing producer prices?) I don't know. Currently Germany is the world's largest exporter, although the relatively low value of the dollar may mean that the USA and Germany may swap places yet again before the end of the year.

FYI

[mabu]

To those ranting about "Microsoft's Rights", let me remind you:

Monopolies are bad because, once established, the alternative sources of competition are crushed. After that is accomplished, the monopolists can do whatever they want.

This is what we have with Microsoft. The government, in an ideal scenario, exists to provide security to the populace, not monopolist corporations, which explains the EU's position on the issue. If you trust corporations, who are entities created with most of the rights of humans, and none of the ethical responsibilities, to better serve the public, you're extremely naive. While there are still are some, we should rally behind forces at work which are seeking to protect the populace against monopolies that seek to stifle competition and innovation.

I have a better idea than 5m per day fine...

[CausticPuppy]

Screw the $5 million per day idea.

Give them 45 days to comply.

On the first day, fine them 1 cent.
On the second day, fine them 2 cents.
3rd day, 4 cents.
4th day, 8 cents. And keep going, doubling the fine each day.

Microsoft will certainly agree to these easy terms!

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[iBod]

Exactly!

It's scary how so many people here seem to think corporations are unstoppable. I think they've been brainwashed.

Corporations are:

1) not lawmakers

2) unelected

3) don't have the financial muscle to go head to head with even minor economic powers.

Still, the fear must be exciting, or something.

Re:Steep? NO!

[symbolic]

One thing that MAY come of this is that the EU, UNLIKE the US, may show everyone they have a spine when it comes do dealing with Microsoft. I'm not sure the US outcome could even be considered a slap on the hand. Nothing really changed, except that now it's public information that Bill Gates & Co. aren't exactly truthful when it comes to their own business affiars. But so what? Thngs are pretty much the same.

GPL presents problems..

[d_jedi]

Because if MS licenses their protocol to one GPL product, they're essentially giving up all license fees to any further companies who would want to use MS's protocols.. why buy a license from MS when you can just use the GPL implementation for free?

Remember that the ruling did NOT say MS must give away their IP for free, only that they license it on a reasonable and non-discriminatory basis.

MS is right to be wary about giving away their intellectual property without appropriate compensation.

Nothing wrong here, just multiple viewpoints

[Anders Andersson]

I believe the patent issue was a European Parliament issue, and the monopoly issue is a European Commission issue - they are different entities, therefore unlikely to directly share any personnel.

The Parliament and the Commission are different entities, true, but it's actually the Commission that is trying desperately to push through the directive on Computer-Implemented Inventions, while the Parliament has been calling for substantial amendments of it. In any case, the Commission runs a large organization of its own, and may well maintain several mutually unrelated agendas at once.

I think however that the software patent issue does not depend on lobbying by Microsoft alone, but also on efforts by other major players in Europe. Therefore even the very same Commission won't necessarily see any problem introducing software patents with one hand while spanking Microsoft with the other. When Microsoft starts using those patents against European interests, we may be hearing a different song from the Commission.

"It ain't over 'til the fat commissioner sings."

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Hakubi_Washu]

Actually I'm a student of history, specializing in WW2 and later. And, concerning macroeconomics, I doubt anyone seriously knowledgeable in any scientific field would outrightly disagree to such a statement as mine, because I said "not necessarily the best", which is another way of saying "I don't know, but a single value rarely accurately describes a complex system". But then, why am I discussing with an anonymous coward (who didn't get my remark as sarcastic, apparently) calling me a whiny-ass moron anyway?

Re:If it were up to me...

[Yaotzin]

...I would force MS to make Office for Linux, WMP for Linux, IE for Linux.

I agree. Allthough I would rather have Office for Linux and then have Microsoft open up their media formats, make them properly GPL, their media player is not that great, I prefer all the good media players that exist on Linux already. IE can stay with Windows as far as I'm concerned, the number of users that use it aswell because it attracts more spyware because of it's majority of users. Firefox is pretty safe but if spyware and adware authors would target Firefox, they would find a way to distribute their crap to the Firefox users aswell.
The fanboys seem to have made their statement to what you said already: "Hahaha...".

Give me a break

[psycho]

For the last fucking time:
it's == it is

Re:Give me a break

[ccr]

Off-topic, but additionally some people should learn the difference between:

• then / than / them
  
• we're / were
  
• they're / there
  

And possibly some other words. Unfortunately I cannot remember all the misuses of english I've encountered.

Re:Give me a break

[BenjyD]

Here's a few:

- whose/who's
- fewer/less
- should have/should of
- "very unique"

Re:Give me a break

[psycho]

>Here's a few:

Couldn't resist: that should be "Here are a few:"

Re:Give me a break

[BenjyD]

I think there is some sort of Murphy's law of the spelling nazi that any post complaining about spelling will contain at least one embarrassing error itself.

which part of ANTI-trust is unclear?

[Moraelin]

You know, I'm otherwise fairly pro-MS, by Slashdot standards. (In much the same way as being right wing in the EU still counts as left wing in the US, and viceversa.) I do believe that MS has all the right in the world to keep the Windows/Office/IE/whatever sources secret. I don't believe that making money or being a corporation is a capital sin. And worse yet, I do believe that they did make a better product.

(Or more precisely, that everyone else had a crappier product. Who was gonna win the OS wars? OS/2? Heh.)

But no, I don't think that API specs should be an internal secret for a company that produces both the OS and the apps.

Allowing the API conspiracy, for lack of a better word, is what allowed MS to be a monopoly in the first place. You can't expect any sort of even playing field as long as Windows contains parts written just for Word or for IE, and parts which can be deliberately broken when a competing product wants to use them.

E.g., the classic example is Novell. They wanted to make their own Netware servers too able to act as a domain controller, so you can choose whichever fits your general needs best for that role. Basically a fair competition on merits, no?

Microsoft didn't even pretend to play fair. It simply informed Novell that if Novell publishes such a product, MS _will_ break it. And they did. They messed with the APIs and with where does that part go inside Windows, until Novell gave up and cancelled the product.

And that's exactly that kind of anti-competitive behaviour that this ruling is supposed to prevent. Because anything else is just giving MS an official blessing to continue the monopolistic behaviour.

Re:which part of ANTI-trust is unclear?

[KarmaMB84]

I think the APIs in question were intended for use only within the Windows OS itself. The APIs were kept secret so they could change them later on without breaking people's apps. Unfortunately, MS programmers have access to them and may have used them in their own products. It's perfectly reasonable for anything that ships with the OS to use them since they are components. I don't know if the other products use them but it is likely.

Re:which part of ANTI-trust is unclear?

[js3]

what part of the windows API is closed again? Oh wait.. the UNPUBLISHED ONE. The one you aren't supposed to used because they may not work on a newer operating system. These companies they hack kernel32.dll and call unpublished routines then they wonder why it doesn't work on a newer operating system

Re: Mini Rant

[Anita Coney]

Yeah, I guess it all depends. On one hand diamonds are worthless because their prices are actually dependant on manipulations of a cartel. But on the other hand, if someone dumb blonde wants to spend a fortune on one to impress other dumb blondes, I guess that's her right.

How much?

[AtariAmarok]

"Yeah, thanks for pointing that out. Not only is the Mini over-priced, but it's under-powered too."

Has anyone figured out how much a PC of similar speed, capabilities, and features as the Mini would cost? I am guessing it would be between 1/2 and 3/4 the cost of the Mini.

Re:GPL is not the center of all Licenses

[mrjohnson]

oy.

Because Samba is GPL and the Samba project uses these protocols.

Then the Mini is no good deal

[AtariAmarok]

"As for power: do you really need it for Joe User functions?"

If you don't care about power, you could get a complete Pentium 2 system with Linux on it, loaded with drives and features missing on the Mini (probably even a monitor, too!) for much less than the price of Mini. You could probably get 3 or so such systems for the price of the Mini.

Re:Then the Mini is no good deal

[jawtheshark]

New? With warranty and an OS that works out of the box? After all, we don't want to spend much time to make an old machine run - it pushes up the price. It's only free if your time is free. The link describes my misadventures of installing Linux on a modern-day machine.

If the Mini had been out, I would have bought a Mini for that guy (machine in above link was not for me). Alas, I already had ordered the parts.

With an Apple you also have to consider the whole package. Just comparing the hardware (which in quality is much better than Dell, HP, etc...) is being blind to the software side of things.

Stats not really comparable

[henni16]

Often people forget that countries use very different methods to calculate the unemployent rate and are comparing apples and oranges
One major point is who you count; examples:

• people who want work, but can't get a job?
• people who don't want to work and live of benefits/social security?
• people who were laid off into pension earlier than necessary?
• close to the point above: people who won't get a job because they are regarded as too old by HR (maybe >35 or 40 years..)
• people who can't work because of health problems?
• people who are in governmental work programs (i.e. retraining programs)?
• how about people that are jobbing here and there, mybe have more than one part-time job?
• related to that: who is counted as "self employed"?

That's one "funny" problem in Germany right now:
Due to a part of a federal law change (meant to reduce unemployment) Germany's rate is jumping right now:
municipalities are "reclassifying" recipients of social security that in reality can't or won't work as people who are able to work (=can _in_theory_ work at _some_ job for at least 3 hours a day), upping the current unemployment rate big time.
The money is about the same, so why are they doing such a silly bureaucratic thing, binding even more resources meant to help willing people find a job, lessening their chances?
A: Because of the new law, unemployment insurance is now payed from the federal fund and municipalities are only responsible for social security.
In some areas more than 99% of former social security recipients are suddenly able to work again.
It's really a wonder! Must be Jesus doing a "Germany 2005 Tour" or something like that..

Now, who didn't see that one coming..

Re:Stats not really comparable

[MyLongNickName]

If you could find me a good source for total employment by country (raw number of full-time workers), I'd be grateful. I think this number would cut through a lot of the BS you mention. Unfortunately, no sites I have found show this number.

Re:Stats not really comparable

[Anonymous Coward]

The question in your mind should be - is what Paris Hilton does considered "employment?"

Re:Stats not really comparable

[henni16]

The question in your mind should be - is what Paris Hilton does considered "employment?" AC, I would really like to mod you up..
Although I am not sure about funny or insightful. ;-)
Actors (no: despite one short film, Paris Hilton is not an actress) for example are one group of people that are difficult to classify in that regard.
They are/were often regularly employed by theaters, movie or TV companys, but usually have a more or less long time between engagements until they get a new role.
Are they allowed to register as unemployed until they are hired for a new role, getting a percentage of the salary for their last movie?

Re:Stats not really comparable

[henni16]

I don't know if such a raw number would help, because you will need percentages to compares them with other countries' numbers.
And then there is the same problem again as the populaion structure may be very different from country to country..

Because of that there is the empiric approach used by ILO/OECD - AFAIK:
Instead of using governmental stats they do surveys and ask people if they have a job, are looking for one, how long they are unemployed etc and use those results to calculate the numbers for each country.

I found their numbers here

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[segal_loves_pandas]

Legacy code my friend... Legacy code...

And I'm not a programmer I'm an Astrophysicist damn it! We can't get enough of the Fortran stuff.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Locke2005]

We're not all isolationist rednecks here in America! In fact, almost half of us are pretty sure that Bush is a Moron. And the other half think that the invasion of Iraq was a good idea, which would make them interventionist rednecks, not isolationist rednecks...

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[KarmaMB84]

Apparently a little more than half as many.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[KarmaMB84]

If MS pulled out and became a truly foreign corporation, wouldn't the EU have to deal with the WTO if they try such a thing?

Re:INCORRECT

[d_jedi]

Rewriting the GPL implementation of MS's protocols so you can use them in your proprietary product would not be significantly more difficult (in fact, it might be easier, depending on how well the GPL implementation is written ) than licensing the protocol from MS and getting their documentation to write your implementation.

And, as you rightfully point out, any other GPL apps can use this implementation without getting a license from Microsoft.. which is clearly not in MS's best interests.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Hakubi_Washu]

I've waited years to be able to actually say this:

I don't think that word means what you think it does :-)

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[segal_loves_pandas]

I think a Phd student in Astrophysics has the right to call himself just that... So my King, whats it like doing a 70 year old chick?

motto

[yagu]

Motto of many a Microsoft employee: Will work for FUD

IIRC, MS has $40 billion in cash

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Which means they could pay this fine every day for the next 21.9 years.

I think this fine isn't Big Enough.

RS

Re:IIRC, MS has $40 billion in cash

[lachlan76]

Could they pay it while paying for staff, buildings (maintenence etc.), power, water, equipment, and other resources for more than two decades though?

Re:IIRC, MS has $40 billion in cash

[Ralph Spoilsport]

Actually, yes, they could, because it's $40 billion IN CASH. All their operating revenue comes from their income and other investments.

The $40 billion is just "sitting in a bank".

HW

A Corporate View

[johnos]

All this arguing about $5 million per day and why should MS care what the EU thinks is completely missing the point. Mega multi-nationals like MS are the servants of capital markets. 95% of the time, the markets don't give a shit what kind of trouble a company has if the profits are rolling in as expected. But, trouble like getting shut out of a market the size of the EU would be disaster. The markets would punish MS severely.

A company that can't do business in the EU is not a global company, and their growth prospects would be drastically reduced. Remember that there's nothing personal here. The stock is worth the market's estimation of all future profits discounted for inflation, capital cost, risk, etc. $5 million a day in fines would have a much lower impact on MS' stock price. That's because the fine is quantified, predictible and likely short-term. But to be shut out of a market the size of the EU is unprecidented in modern corporate history. No corporate leader could possibly risk such an event. Imagine the shareholder lawsuits if MS stock price fell because they refused to comply with a the law in a juristiction the size of the EU. MS would knuckle under far before such a thing could happen.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Hakubi_Washu]

And how exactly have I displayed being "a prejudiced person who is intolerant of any opinions differing from his own"? (http://www.google.com/search?q=define:+bigot)

We have not even had an argument or an exchange of opinions in the first place... So how could I have even been intolerant of any opinion? (Adding that I can't even be sure I'm talking to the same Anonymous Coward all the time who apparently values his word so little he doesn't even risk his precious "Karma"). No I think this is simple flame-bait and trolling so far, I just tend to enjoy some trolls more than many "serious" posts on /. apparently :-)
Maybe I'll get a good response this time, otherwise this discussion is over, it's getting pretty boring...

Parnet False

[MyLongNickName]

I always love superficial analysis like this. The fact is France and Germany's unemployment has been trouble for decades.

The US has had some trouble spots. But none like you mention:

http://www.itcilo.it/english/actrav/telearn/glob al /ilo/seura/usunemp.htm

Re:GPL is not the center of all Licenses

[Dav3K]

Apple does not have the market share to present much of a threat to MS - on that I agreed. To then extrapolate that this is because of the way Apple prices their product is ludicrous. Microsoft also overcharges for their product, yet it hasn't slowed them down much. Hey - newsflash: Sony charges a lot too. It really has little to do with the topic at hand though, doesn't it? Apple could sell their kit at half price and still wouldn't do much better than double thier market share - why? because there will still be that missing application, or corporate policy or some other reason why people don't buy in. To state that pricing is the single most important thing stopping Apple from being competition to Microsoft is a gross oversimplification of matters.

But hey, if I was whoring for karma, I suppose it's as good a bait as any.

Great.

[jd]

Th Queen and the Royal Family pay taxes like other citizens, to show that they are members of society. It took time to convince them, but they eventually accepted that that was the right thing to do.

Now you're saying Bill Gates is trying to become exempt from taxes...

If he's putting himself above royalty, we have a problem.

Re:Pot calling Kettle Black

[a whoabot]

"Bottom line though is that Microsoft didn't do anything wrong, goverments are just looking at a quick way to make money while keeping the public happy by not raising taxes."

What ridiculous conjecture.

If the governments want more money without taxing they'll just get their treasuries to tell the central banks to circulate more euros. They control a fiat currency that nearly everyone uses: they don't need to take money from other people if they need more. For most modern governments, money does grow on trees.

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[purple_cobra]

I'm sure the EU would be just as open to suggestions on its trade policy from the WTO as they are from MS...
Ultimately the WTO are toothless against entities the size of the EU and the USA. A trade war would be stupid, but it's enlightened self-interest that stops such an occurence not the WTO.

Ease of learning is a feature

[tepples]

Has anyone figured out how much a PC of similar speed, capabilities, and features as the Mini would cost?

Ease of learning how to use the preinstalled operating system is an important feature to many residential users. Which x86 operating system has a graphical environment that balances ease of learning and ease of power-use as well as Mac OS X does?

Terms

[omb]

The legal phrase is "reasonable and non-descrimatory terms".

So, for example, when IBM was faced with a similar requirement they were allowed to charge USD 5 per printed manual, and , in general, up to 5 manuals per product were allowed.

These days one would expect the .pdf(s) to be almost free.

The main point is that M$ blatant contempt of court orders will catch up with them much faster here when whole actions are often struck-out (dismissed) or decided in a month -- none of your SCO circus.

Finally, company officers can go to jail for contempt.

Keep it up Sir Bill!

Re:WTF

[Sj0]

Americans can't comprehend the tinyness of european nations just as europeans can't comprehend the vastness of american nations, in my opinion.

Re:Pot calling Kettle Black

[Linker3000]

Are you assuming I am American? - I am from the UK as it happens.

Many have the impression (rightly or wrongly) in Europe that the EU is a cosy club for the French and Germans, although the latter are currently pre-occupied with their own economic mess.

Going back to France for a moment - maybe you do not recall the time when France refused to accept British beef long after the EU scientists and food agencies declared it completely safe and over the BSE crisis - the EU governing body even imposed a massive daily fine, but France never paid a Euro and British farmers suffered nearly 3 years of financial hardship. Go looksee: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/2269808.st m

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Hezaurus]

> Yeah, how many people it took to generate this sort of output in US as opposed to Europe?

Don't think about people. Think about workin hours. You'll soon find out that people in europe have life outside work too. I live in Finland. My annual salary (without taxes) falls within the 40000..50000$ range. I have 30 days off + ~12 national holidays and 8 hour working day with 1/2 hour lunch + 2*15 minute coffee breaks.

Even though we finns are mostly workaholics it's nothing compared to you guys over there.

Got my point? The average american works much much longer hours with much lower salary to remain competitive than average european and even then he doesn't have 40+ days off.

Software Patents: The EU (and US )are hypocritical

[grolschie]

From the Zdnet article:
Microsoft has been found guilty by the highest authorities in Europe -- as in the US -- of abusing its monopoly position. As a result, the company is required to stop that abuse. In this case, it has been told it must make server protocols available: by withholding that information, it has prevented companies from writing competitive software

Isn't that what the EU and US software patent laws are intended for?

You don't know the meaning of the word

[geekee]

"$1.8 billion a year would be a big boost to free software if an EU agency were to funnel it into free software development. That would anger Microsoft more than increasing the fine would. "

It's pathetic how people here claim to value freedom, but have no problem taking away someone's freedom when they don't like what they're doing. So now you want private companies to pay for your free software and use the force of govt. to get what you want. So much for freedom.

RTFA, whomever did the writeup

[geekee]

"Microsoft was attempting to bypass the regulation by offering a license totally incompatible with the GPL and which has an absurdly high fee attached."

At issue is opening up protocols, not source code. WTF does the GPL have to do with anything? Why should anyone have the right to force the GPL on MS anyway for their own code?

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[RedBear]

You are a perfect example of why most of the rest of the world considers the average American to be a pompous, arrogant, ignorant, a-hole. Which is why, as you may have noticed, you've been modded as flamebait, even though you claimed not to be.

Due to the market penetration of Windows, the EU would come crawling back, begging for Windows marketing to be reinstated.

Any country or group of countries in their right mind would consider such a thing a virtual ATTACK on said country(ies) survival and economic prosperity, due to the monopolistic market penetration of Windows. As far as I (an American) am concerned, the countries in question would be well within their rights and responsibilities to their citizens to terminate all local copyrights, patents and trademarks owned by Microsoft, to allow the country to continue to supply itself with the dominant Microsoft software (for survival) while they work on moving everything over to OS X, Linux and other alternative software that won't allow them to be brought to their knees by a single corporation ever again.

The fact that the EU could be literally forced to come begging a single corporation to come back and do business with them after said corporation basically committed the equivalent of a terrorist attack on their member nations is exactly why monopolists cannot be allowed to abuse their monopolies, and why monopolies should be discouraged from even existing. Nothing should have that much power over the economy of an entire nation.

Do you not realize that if they have this power over the EU, they have the same power over the US? How is that acceptable just because they are an American-based company? Would it be cool if Microsoft just "pulled out" of the government software market, refused to sell to the US government and stopped giving them any service or updates? Hopefully you would be outraged at any American company that did such a thing, especially a company like Microsoft that wields monopoly power in our economy. It would essentially be an attack on the government's ability to run and protect our precious America.

The fact that you think it would be A-OK for an American company to do such a thing as long as it doesn't do it in the US, is absolutely frightening. You come off like you think God made Americans in His own image and we are the Chosen People who can do no wrong. You think any American company can go anywhere in the world and do whatever it wants without regard to local laws, and without ever being fined for breaking the law, just because it's a US-based company? And then you sit back and wonder why so much of the population of Earth hates Americans with a passion.

My basic point is that, as an American, why should we give a flying flip what the EU wants?! It's not like they really have any enforcement powers beyond their member's borders...

As Americans, "we" don't really care what the EU wants. But if you want to GO to the EU and do business IN THEIR COUNTRIES, you need to abide by their rules, just like their companies need to abide by our rules when they do business in the US. Is there something complicated about that? They aren't trying to enforce anything beyond their own borders! They are merely dictating the behavior of Microsoft's branches in their own area of the world.

In their part of the world, where Microsoft, being a multinational corporation, very much desires to continue doing business, Microsoft has been convicted of abusing its monopoly position in the market (breaking the law). They've been told to stop violating the local laws. They refused, so the EU imposed some fines and remedies. Microsoft in effect thumbed their nose at the fines and remedies imposed by the courts, so the EU is going to impose more fines, as is their right to do in their own part of the world. Again, is there something complicated here?

I always wonder how people even get ideas like yours into their heads. If you gave it just a smidgen of thought those ideas SHOULD self-destr

Grammatical error du jour

[Zorilla]

sebFlyte writes "ZDNet is reporting the news that the EU has rejected Microsoft's attempt to wriggle out of it's legal obligation to open up Windows protocols.

"its"

Wow, now they can't even get grammar correct.

Due process.

[tepples]

It's pathetic how people here claim to value freedom, but have no problem taking away someone's freedom when they don't like what they're doing.

It's not that we just don't like what Microsoft is doing. Remember that Microsoft has been convicted of abusing its operating system monopoly in violation of law. I know what "liberty" is, and I know that "due process of law" (and foreign counterparts) is justification for taking it away.

So now you want private companies to pay for your free software

Is it any worse than having convicted individuals do x-hundred hours of community service?

Re:Just a thought from the right...

[Hakubi_Washu]

Ah, another fine example of assuming things... I'm no leftist, sorry, just because you don't agree with me (I never disagreed with the original poster) that doesn't put me in a position diametrical to the label you choose for yourself, but that's just bean-counting, isn't it?

So, on to the argument at hand: Why does anyone think the UN is morally superior to any other nation? Well, first off, it's not a nation, but a council of nations. That gives it exactly the same amount of moral superioritity as any other representative council, say a parliament for example. Is that morally superior? No, it can never be so per se. It's the part about being more or less democratic that's interesting here. If a majority of those involved can reach a consensus, that's usually considered democratic and thus a more aceptable way of handling things than, say, one nation simply attacking another on a whim.
So, is the UN too slow to handle things? Sometimes. I sure wish they'd have more power (The U.S. would have to face sanctions for attacking a whole lot of countries under fraudulent accusations then), but does lack of power and slow reaction time require someone to "simply have the guts to do it in their place"? That's the national equivalent of self-justice, a practice looked down upon as barbaric in most so-called "civilized" countries...
So, is the UN more right to order sanctions and eventually send troops? In my personal opinion, no (I'm no leftist, as I said, I prefer everyone to keep his nose out of other peoples life). But it sure has a way more democratic backing than anyone else, simply because it represent everyone else's consensus... If you don't believe in democracy, than, of course, I can understand your reaction, but please refrain from bringing your version of it to others by force, will you?

OT: Thanks!

[DeadScreenSky]

That gave me quite a laugh. Thanks for the link.

Now I think I am going to go cry somewhere... :D

CRAZY...

[c1one]

If I make a product and you buy it... there is no way I would let you tell me what to do with it! It does not physically harm anyone so there should be NO LAWS regarding its use and development. Don't use it if you don't like it.

Re:CRAZY...

[Anonym0us Cow Herd]

Don't use it if you don't like it.

Great idea. The EU should halt the sales of MS products.


You seem to forget that MS is a monopoly. They are violating antitrust laws. The court has ordered them to do certian things for interoperability. MS has flagrantly defied the court order.

You seem to hold to LAW as you capitalize it. So why don't you think that Microsoft should have to obey the law? Should Microsoft get to disregard a court order with impunity?

Re:and...

[Thomas Shaddack]

You can not use nukes. Once you do, you make it an acceptable way - and your "umbrella" won't stop your *own* *test* probes, so for the SS-27 Topol-M beauties it won't be even a slow-down. Remember you are not the only one with ICBMs anymore. Such infantile sabre-rattling is laughable.

Your empire is still big, but in quiet nights you can hear the termites in its beams. Once the foreign banks start dumping dollars, you're toast.

Be careful. Very careful.

Re:Arrest Bill Gates?

[bluGill]

They can go as high as they want. However the US is unlikely to hand Bill Gates over, so all this would really do is make sure Bill Gates never goes to the EU for any reason (vacation).

Don't read to much into the US not handing over Bill Gates. Countries generally have an agreement that they will hand over anyone who breaks the local equivalent of their laws, and will be punished in a way consistent with their laws. Most EU countries will not hand over a murder to the US unless the US agrees to not seek the death penalty for example, while the US will always hand an accused murderer over to EU nations. (Eu nations will give a honest trial, this doesn't apply to every country)

Re: Mini Rant

[jawtheshark]

It's more like buying a Ferrari versus buying a Porsche. The Ferrari will outperform a Porsche of the same price. Difference is: maintenance costs of a Ferrari are insanely high and you're not sure the thing will start the day you need it. A Porsche on the other hand is a dependable machine that will start every day and do what you ask from it.

The mini is something like a Porsche: at least it will work when the latest Windows exploit ravages the x86 population (Ferraris)

Same price: different quality.

(Note to Ferrari fans: Ferrari quality may have changed by now. I'm just using the classic prejudices against the brand)

Which competitors?

[leonbrooks]

"Today's $5M project will be to add handwriting recognition to the KDE project." Who is the competitor here?

Mod points?

[leonbrooks]

I think Sj0 just earned some.

State-run everything just sucks, but you do need some basic infrastructure to be state-guaranteed.

One fine for each offense

[leonbrooks]

First offence: Monopolisation. Fine $5M/day.

Second offence: Contempt of Court. Fine $50M/day.

Re:One fine for each offense

[sepluv]

Hmm..Microsoft are just taking the piss out of the high court of the largest supranational organisation in the world (European Court of Justice) which is probably a Baaad idea.

They will not be taking the piss when they get told by the court to cease trading in the EU (which accounts for a massive proportion of their sales).

Training

[leonbrooks]

This used to happen on trains as well in the UK. You travel without a ticket and if you get away with it maybe 5 times, if you are caught and fined on the 6th occasion, you're still better off than you would have been if you were buying tickets each day.

Didn't they stop that by formally arresting, carting off and warrant-checking every offender?

ISTR something about risk-takers who would ride without a ticket being highly likely to be wanted in connection with other things, too. And the time, embarrassment and discomfort spent near clink while the paperwork was sorted out would be a considerably greater incentive to honesty than the actual fine. And the risk of being warrant-checked and winding up really in clink should keep a lot of nasties off the trains, too.