Slashdot Mirror


Deadline Looming for Microsoft in Antitrust Case

gaijincory writes "The International Herald Tribune reminds us that the end of the month is Microsoft's deadline to comply with the European Commission's antitrust ruling. The fine for non-compliance? A cool $5 million per day."

6 of 397 comments (clear)

  1. Re:And at that rate... by MisterLawyer · · Score: 4, Informative
    Actually, at that rate, Microsoft would still be able to function indefinately. (ceteris paribus, of course)

    Microsoft has an average daily global sales revenue of $100 million. $5 million is about 5% of their global sales. Their profit margins far exceed 5%, therefore they could continue to pay their daily fine to the E.U. and still make a profit every day.

    Also, the E.U. already fined them about $600 million in addition to the prospective daily fine. Thats the same as about four months worth of the daily $5 million fine.

  2. Re:This the same EU? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Informative

    As for the EU's inability to get their member states to vote favorably on the Constitution, many believe this has more to do with Europeans' sentiments about their national leaders which are pushing the Constitution through.

    Have you tried reading the draft constitution? Seriously, they need to scrap it and start again. Not because it's bad but because it's barely comprehensible. You can pick bits and pieces you like or dislike and try to sell it on that but trying to sell the thing as a whole is impossible - anyone who pays attention will say "no" simply because they don't understand what they're being asked to agree to.

  3. Re:This the same EU? by kentmartin · · Score: 5, Informative

    You might want to do a little reading before spouting off. EU law supercedes the law of member states when the 2 come into conflict. The recent developments in the IR35 debacle in the UK are a fine example.

    This is why, as per the article you mention above, there is a lot of dissent among member states about what the constitution is, they are agreeing to that law for themselves.

    Further, my understanding is that the policies with regard to monopolies and competition have already been agreed upon, hence, the 'European competition regulator' whose existence is made possible by The Treaty Establishing The European Community, article 81, at least I think it is 81. Either way, there is a list of what is already in play from that treaty with respect to fair competition here.

    Take a glance at The EU online, and I would strongly suggest you do a modicum of research before spurting disinformation presented as fact.

    People like you piss me off.

  4. Re:Compliance by Raphael · · Score: 4, Informative
    I doubt they make 5 million+ a day in europe,

    The fine mentioned by the EU is up to 5% of Microsoft's worldwide sales (the absolute maximum according to EU law is 10%). As they currently make about 100 million a day, that translates to about 5 million. I expect that more than 5% of their worldwide sales come from the EU, so they probably make more than 5 million a day in Europe.

    On the curiosity side, would someone care to outline exactly what it is the EU is demanding that MSFT do to 'comply'?

    This is mentioned briefly in the article. Compliance requires basically two things: distribute Windows without the Media Player and document the API or protocols used in some server products so that competitors can create products that can talk to Microsoft's products.

    Personally, I am more interested in the second requirement as it could be beneficial to Linux and free/open source software. I also heard that the EU is not happy with the way Microsoft handled that part (restrictive licensing for the documentation) so there is hope that they will force Microsoft to be more open.

    --
    -Raphaël
  5. Re:Explain to me... by IchBinEinPenguin · · Score: 4, Informative

    Monopolies are bad for consumers, so the rules change when you're a monopoly.
    If I make 1% of all cars on the road, and decide to 'bundle' the cars with a certain roadmap, that's OK. Other mapmakers can still compete, consumers still have choice, that choice allows them to exert pressure on the mapmakers to improve their product. This is how capitalism is supposed to work: consumers vote with their wallets to make producers compete.
    If I make 90% of all cars on the road and do the same bundling, other mapmakers are effectively excluded from the market. Consumers no longer have any choice, therefore no way to exert pressure on the mapmaker to improve the product.
    As an example, plot the 'growth' in IE. During BrowserWar1 (IE vs Netscape) IE improved in leaps and bounds. Then it was mostly dormant for a few years (except for patches). Now, with BrowserWar2 (IE vs Firefox) IE is being improved again (IE7 is being released with tabbed browsing).

    competition = choice = power for consumers = better products
    monopoly = no choice = powerless consumers = stagnation