Slashdot Mirror
Real And Microsoft Close to Settlement
pdirty writes "Real networks may be close to winning a $750 million settlement agreement with Microsoft following Real's antitrust lawsuit against Microsoft. The deal would include Microsoft paying cash as well as advertising for Real services, and products through channels such as MSN. Real is holding a conference call after the closing bell today to announce the details." From the article: "The deal follows on the heels of the European Commission appointing a watchdog last week to monitor Microsoft's compliance with its antitrust ruling. The pact is the latest in a string of payments by Microsoft to settle charges, including $750 million in 2003 to Time Warner to end charges about Microsoft acting to suppress Netscape, and $1.95 billion to Sun Microsystems to settle a suit by Sun over Microsoft's use of incompatible Java technology."
I'm going to have to side with MS on this one. Real released a crappy product with a shady web site. I think it's a shame to capitalism that the better product will be funding the lessor product in this case.
-Rick
"Most people in the U.S. wouldn't know they live in a tyrannical state if it walked up and grabbed their junk." - MyFirs
"Under the music and games agreements, Microsoft is scheduled to pay Real $301 million in cash and provide services over 18 months in support of Real's product development, distribution, and promotional activities."
Oh great, now when we start up an XBOX, a notification of a RealPlayer update will appear in the corner, all the media and game files will be hijacked to only work in their player, and the configuration settings are buried in 3 subsets of obscurely-titled menus.
I wonder what it must feel like to be in charge of quality control and implementation of this new Win-Real venture?
He who knows best knows how little he knows. - Thomas Jefferson
Hmm... do you think it could possibly be because, unlike Microsoft, Apple doesn't have (and abuse) a monopoly on desktop operating systems?
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Actually, that is the free market. You're (through witless sarcasm) implying you want socialism. Here's your little joke properly worded 1) Make inferior product 2) Whine to politicians 3) Sue over a monopoly that by definition doesn't exist 4) Get pro-linux nerds (who also can't compete, on the desktop) all worked up and indignant on your side 5) Post to SlashDot so your fellow geeky dweebs can get all worked up 6) Win lawsuit 7) Profit!
I stopped using RealPlayer after the "G2" version came out (1998, I think?). Even then, it was becoming bloated crapware. Just what I want is for Microsoft, how ever evil they may be, to be FORCED to include that crapware with Windows. OS X includes iTunes, and nobody complains about that. Most Linux distros include XMMS, and nobody cries.
RealNetworks has done more damage to themselves than anyone else could, through the overpromotion of unstable software, with annoying ads, and 192352398235 different taskbar crapplets that nobody wants. After most streaming sources went to either streaming MP3 or WMA, Real pretty much died. They lost a market they created due to poor management and bad software. Nobody cares about them anymore, and frankly, I wish they'd just get bought or disappear alltogether.
Note to mods: please only select the "-1 Flamebait" box if you REALLY think I'm flaming. Personally, I don't think I am, but it's up to you.
Windows Media Player has been included since Windows 3.1. Apple had quicktime since System 6. This was way before real even existed as a company. This lawsuit is about Microsoft bundling media player in windows.
Have you ever been to a turkish prison?
If I speed down the road, but not too bad I get a fine.
If I speed down the road going too fast, I have to go to court, potential of jail time, fines, etc.
If I continue to do these things over and over again, I'm labeled as a habitual offender and have other court fun to go through.
Microsoft on the other hand just has to keep doing what they are doing and paying fines and now doing "community service" by putting advertisements for a competitor on their websites (which I think is wrong).
Personally, I would prefer just to be in the fine department for my behavior. Where do I get these privileges?
Well gang, that's it. RightSaidFred says MS isn't a monopoly. I guess all those courts are wrong. I mean, seriously, what would they know? It's not like it's their job to interpret the law or something.
Newsflash: sometimes what the law says a word means and what the dictionary says a word means aren't one and the same.
Don't like it? Neither do I. I also don't like how we supposedly have "freedom of speach" and "freedom of assembly". Without a proper qualifier in front of "freedom", the assumption is that it is total freedom. Not "mostly free, unless you want to slander/libel/scream-fire-in-a-crowded-theatre".
OS X comes with iTunes yet there is no foul play there...
All sorts of people go to school playgrounds and it isn't illegal for them, so convicted child molesters out on parole shouldn't have any trouble going there either.
Luckily, the laws say otherwise. Monopolies can't use their monopoly to create a new one. Apple sells computers and bundles an OS and a mouse and iTunes. They don't have a monopoly on any of those things. MS does have a monopoly on desktop OS's, thus they can't bundle new products with it. If they want to sell the media player as a separate product with financing segregated from Windows that is fine.
Monopoly--1 : exclusive control of a particular market that is marked by the power to control prices and exclude competition and that esp. is developed willfully rather than as the result of superior products or skill (Source: Merriam-Webster's Dictionary of Law, © 1996 Merriam-Webster, Inc.)
By the legal definition I would say that Microsoft is a monopoly and this position has been upheld in court. As Adam Smith pointed out monopolies are the enemy of good management and therefore antithetical to a free market. It is in the best interest of healthy competition to regulate monopolies and restrain them from abusing their power.
I went to the city because I wished to live without deliberation.
Oh, GREAT. If there was one piece of software that I wanted to see starved off by Microsoft's monopoly, it was RealPlayer. I don't like how Windows Media Player 8/9/10 promotes DRM, installs a DRM service in every Windows XP computer (mspmspsv.exe), and may potentially install more DRMware at the driver or kernel level, but Real is no better. Their software is harder to install, and more bloated and cumbersome than Windows Media Player 9. Their software uses an even worse "web portal" interface than WMP, and performs worse in erratic stream playback than WMP. And their RealOne player is one of the most invasive pieces of software when installed. It's basically spyware and malware.
From what I've seen, support for streaming media is heading away from Real and toward Windows Media merely because all the computers with Windows XP preinstalled can play WM files already, as opposed to having to download and run the Real installer. The fact that many media sites already have to deal with enterprise MS software licensing may have something else to do with it. Despite being an ISO standard and natively streamable, MPEG 4 has been plagued by the codec mess (mostly Microsoft's fault) four years ago. There is no single "MPEG 4" codec; instead, there's Microsoft's MPEG 4, DivX, XviD, QuickTime, blah, blah, blah. Users are turned away due to the sheer number of codecs they have to download just to view one video. The newest "universal" MPEG format is still MPEG 2, and it doesn't get the compression that many people need to make video sizes or bandwidths palatable to the customers.
And so now, in the next version of Windows, we'll all have RealONE bundled in, but hopefully with less access violations and bluescreens than the program delivers now. And, hopefully, with a more consumer-friendly and less surreptitious frontend. I'd rather watch Microsoft choke Real to death with WMP; despite the DRM and Microsoft-coded bizarreness, Real's software is worse.
"Ancillary does not mean you get to rule the world." --U.S. Circuit Judge Harry Edwards, speaking to the FCC's lawyer
A story about Real and we already have 3 Apple worship posts.
Something Apple phans may not know: Real supported Linux when nobody else did. Only windows/apple people seem to bitch about Real.
MP3 and Real was all we had on Linux. Somebody supported Linux when somebody else was taking subsidies from Microsoft.
It really should read that consumers are paying Real 750 million dollars. Microsoft isn't going anywhere, hence everyone who buys a preloaded PC or uses services of someone who did will indirectly pay this fine.
Most fines against businesses simply move money from one businesses pocket to another or to the government. The consumer never sees any of it back. Unless a company is driven under by penalty for their actions there is no real loss. One set of shareholders sees a smaller return compared to another. Those shareholders are probably the only "real" people affected directly by the exchange.
It does look like a feeding frenzy at Microsoft's expense. Most of their competitors failed because of inferior programs. Netscaped sucked for most the 4.xx series and Real has been horrid bloatware/adware for God knows how long.
* Winners compare their achievements to their goals, losers compare theirs to that of others.
However, I really think the EU made itself ridiculous by ordering Microsoft to ship an alternative version of Windows without the Media Player. Microsoft created that "Windows Reduced Media Edition" (a name that doesn't quite suggest you should buy it) and sold it at the same price (!) as Windows with the Media Player. Obviously they didn't do anything to generate demand for that particular version. So what's the point in all of that? It just became a matter of principle for some bEUrocrats.
Moreover, the EU Commission lacks a consistent strategy for the software market. On the one hand, they start those anti-trust proceedings and believe they make the market more competitive (which the "Windows Reduced Media Edition" obviously didn't). On the other hand, the EU Commission was a driving force behind that EU software patent directive. And now the EU Commission even wants to retry and legalize software patents in Europe as a side effect of a so-called "community patent regulation":
ZDNet UK: EC slipping software patents "through backdoor"
TheInquirer.net: EU attempts to intro software patents by the back door
That makes no sense to me. A bundling of Windows with the Media Player isn't even 1% as bad as patents on multimedia data formats. The bundling may affect market share over time and it may make consumers less likely to choose another software for playing digital media, but patents constitute monopolies from day one and potentially eliminate all choice.
It does look like a feeding frenzy at Microsoft's expense. Most of their competitors failed because of inferior programs.
Well, if MS wants to compete fairly, they can easily avoid these problems in future simply by offering these programs as separate purchases without discounts for bundling them together. Better yet, they could spin off their applications divisions and bid alongside Real, Mozilla, Apple, and Sun for programs to be included on OEM PCs. If MS is not willing to play fair, then customers suffer and MS will keep losing these big settlements.
Well see MS was not declared a monopoly until court pronounced it as such. So what are companies supposed to do until then?
When you are at 69% market share something is legal and at 70% it is not? Even the courts or the laws cannot agree is what exactly a monopoly is. The entire concept of having a monopoly and abusing it is f'ed up. This is esp. true when competitors can do the same. The way I look at it, if Apple bundles iTunes with their OS, and MS competes with them, they should be allowed to do the same.
Of course the problem is how to protect companies like Real wants to compete with Apple and MS, on particular part of their OS. There are no good answers that treats everyone fairly.
Neither is Microsoft, Apples existence proves that (Not to mention Linux, UNIXex etc)
C17H21NO4
However unethical M$FT might have been, for once I wish they'd one. Real screwed themselves over, as far as I'm concerned. Their products have always come accross as second rate, full of ads, annoying popups, bundeled with crap I didn't want/need. $750 million to Real means it's just going to take longer for them to crumble. Maybe if they can start developing decent software, I might consider using them again - maybe. I've HATED real player since at least version 7 or so. The only thing I can say positive about the company is that they package their player on a wide range of platforms, including Linux (albeit out of date). I, for one, will be happy to see the day when Real goes out of business, once and for all.
Consumers will not be paying any more. Why? Because MS is already charging them as much as it can. The money will come out of MS's profits
Unless a company is driven under by penalty for their actions there is no real loss.
Just like unless a person is driven bankrupt by their fines for criminal actions there is no real loss.
One set of shareholders sees a smaller return compared to another. Those shareholders are probably the only "real" people affected directly by the exchange.
And that's as it should be. They are the people who ultimately control the corporation. Some of them will invest elsewhere instead. MS stocks go down. To a company, its stock is its life.
Real has been horrid bloatware/adware for God knows how long.
Real was horrid bloatware and now isn't, really. Try it.
I am trolling
Although it is definitely arguable that bundling an audio player in the OS is 'monopolistic behavior', one thing does come to mind.
Adding all of those settlement sums up (Sun + Real + Netscape + etc...) the total $$ amount is still very trivial compared to the amount of money they were able to make from offering their version of reality and bundling all of those products in the OS install.
So the moral of the story, - if there is one - is that in business, it sometimes pay handsomely to take calculated risks and get away with what may amount to nothing more than a slap on the wrist. However one wants to hate Micro$oft, it is undeniable that someone there was charting a course that ensured the company's survival and growth through the decade's first half. When studying the ecology of multinational corporate entities in the late 20th Century, this can be seen as quite Darwinian in a sense.....
Z.
If crappy Real Player can squeeze out $750 million alone from Microsoft's monopolist/predatory behavior, then obviously Time Warner settled for far less by accepting earlier an equal dollar figure to settle the Netscape case. The damage done to Netscape - and AOL indirectly by the over reliance on IE for Joe Blow's sake - is far more than what Real suffered from.
Real's main problem is with Real itself. Its product, and how it treated its virtual customers, the casual users.
Hmmm...maybe with such sufficient cash reserves, Apple might be tempted to finally sue Real over that nice little DMCA violation it committed last year by cracking Fairplay's DRM. I'd rather see Apple with another $750 million than Real anyday.
"Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
Kraco, the maker of cheezy one-size-fits all floor mats, will collect a $2.25 billion settlement from the Big 3 automakers for including floor mats with their automobiles.
"Chrysler, Ford, and GM have no right to 'bundle' floor mats with their products," said Ron Popiel IV, president pro tem of Kraco Enterprises Inc. "This is clearly an abuse of their market position to consolidate their monopoly on floor mats."
In a related story, Pioneer, Blaupunkt and Kenwood have announced plans to jointly sue the automakers for providing radios with their vehicles.
Creating an improved filesystem is unlikely to fun afoul of antitrust laws because it is an integral part of the system, because one already existed before MS gained a monopoly, and because their is no market for desktop filesystems. Building advanced searching is likewise an improvement of already existing searching
.. gasp.. survived. And btw, I do like Windows Media Player.
A filesystem which searches in seconds versus one that searches in minutes is as integral as a media player that plays all formats available. Considering Windows is a user-centric OS, I would say its more important.
WinFS (when released) will severly cut into desktop search products from Yahoo and Google, in fact there will be no need from products from Yahoo and Google.
As for what is and what isn't integral to the Operating System, its not that easy. I would venture to say that Antivirus and Antispyware software is integral, yet I would guess that if Microsoft bundled antivirus software they would get hit with lawsuits from Novell and McAfee.
The truth is MS sucks ass even more and broke the law because they could and have shut down and locked out more small companies than anyone can count.
So? Microsoft is already paying for this, not by the fines, but by the speedy adoption of Linux on desktop and server systems. In the short term, monopoly wins, in the long-term it loses because people do move to alternatives. My friend never used a Windows machine in his life (mac, BSD, BeOS, Linux and now OSX). He
And how is Windows locking out Real? Anyone can download it anytime.
The point is MS should have to compete on equal footing with all the other media player creators when talking to Dell.
Would those be the same companies that either pay Dell or severly subsidize their software to be include on a Dell system? My Dell laptop came with the full version of MusicMatch and had Novell Anti-virus 30-day trial on it. Do you not think Dell got money for those?(Hint: yes). Your defintion of 'equal footing' seems to imply they can buy off Dell to reach a wider audience but not Microsoft.