Slashdot Mirror
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.
I was wondering how Brown was going to afford those bus passes for the elderly. He's a sneaky one, that Chancellor.
This comment was formatted for readability, but I forgot the line break tags
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.
The right to offend is far more important than the right not to be offended. (Rowan Atkinson)
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.
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
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.
See my journal for slashdot ID's by year. Mine created in 2005. http://slashdot.org/journal/289875/slashdot-ids-by-year
I checked on Bill's /. poll response. Evidently, he's not interested in Emporor. He's holding out for Kwisatz Haderach.
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.
A polar bear is a cartesian bear after a coordinate transform.
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.
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.
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.
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."