Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Microsoft Faces Fresh Antitrust Complaints

Posted by ryuzaki0 on from the fresh-means-a-new-smell dept.

Rob wrote to mention a Computer Business Online review piece about new anti-trust action against Microsoft on both sides of the Atlantic. From the article: "Other examples of anticompetitive behavior cited by Tangent include bundling of Outlook with Office and Active Directory with Windows Server, as well as the bundling of Windows Media Player and Windows Media Server with its desktop and server operating system respectively. Microsoft did not respond to a request for comment on Tangent's complaint, other than to acknowledge that it was being reviewed, but was more forthcoming in responding to a fresh complaint lodged with the European Commission by the European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS)."

9 of 429 comments (clear)

  1. Will buy time by bogaboga · · Score: 3, Informative
    I predict that even with this complaint, M$ will buy time if it turns into a suit. This buying of time has worked well for M$ in the past. They (M$) will require clarifications, will complain and submit incomplete information as time goes by. By the time any verdict is made, it will have no teeth!

    Remember we started the present suit against M$ in 2001...5 years later we see no change!

  2. Re:media player by creepynut · · Score: 3, Informative

    The Internet Explorer licence states that you must have a licence to Windows in order to run it. Meaning, you can download IE and install it on Linux, but according to the licence, it's not legal.

    NOTE: IF YOU DO NOT HAVE A VALID EULA FOR ANY "OS PRODUCT" (INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, MICROSOFT WINDOWS 98, MICROSOFT WINDOWS NT 4.0, MICROSOFT WINDOWS 2000, MICROSOFT MILLENNIUM EDITION, MICROSOFT WINDOWS XP, OR ANY OTHER MICROSOFT OPERATING SYSTEM THAT IS A SUCCESSOR TO ANY OF THE FOREGOING OPERATING SYSTEMS) YOU ARE NOT AUTHORIZED TO INSTALL, COPY, OR OTHERWISE USE THE OS COMPONENTS AND YOU HAVE NO RIGHTS UNDER THIS SUPPLEMENTAL EULA.

    Unfortunately, I don't have a link to this, I just copy and pasted from the IE6 Installer. I imagine Windows Media Player has something similar.

  3. Re:media player by Moby+Cock · · Score: 2, Informative

    WMP does not establish a monopoly. The issue is that the OS monopoloy is being leveraged to restrict competition with other media players. Consumers (or so the theory goes) need not buy or even acquire another media player because WMP is already there. This stifles competition. And it is illegal.

  4. Re:media player by bluefoxlucid · · Score: 3, Informative

    Ubuntu Linux comes with these applications; uninstalling them removes the 'ubuntu-desktop' meta-package. Subsiquently, upgrading to the next release of Ubuntu without having 'ubuntu-desktop' installed breaks Ubuntu.

    I just spent quite a few attacks at them chiding them for poor behavior packaging the ubuntu-desktop seed with python bindings and development tools not used by any visible user applications. This was out of scope for what they describe on their site; and removing it would remove the desktop seed, breaking upgrades of the OS.

    At no point , however, did I threaten to sue them for what they were doing, or even imply that they didn't have a right to do it; my only arguments were that it was immature and out of scope for their project, and that they seemed to be trying to keep people from finding out about all the extra bloat—mainly by only mentioning it on one very obscure, short, and burried FAQ entry instead of blatantly stating, "And Ubuntu comes with a full set of Python development tools out of the box," on the main page.

    It has been said that the reason Python tools are included with Ubuntu but not C or C++ tools is that "Ubuntu wants to encourage Python development" and "when the user goes to pick a language to use, Python will already be there and ready, so they'll use that." Nobody has tried to sue Canonical. You still have the choice NOT TO USE IT, even if not NOT TO HAVE IT.

    --
    Support my political activism on Patreon.
  5. Re:Outlook? by tpgp · · Score: 2, Informative
    Whilst I have no idea whether the complaint is fair or not, I believe that the quote from the article summary about 'bundling' outlook & AD is innacurate.

    This article seems to say that the complaint is that you cannot interoprate with the bundled components - a far more reasonable complaint.
    In its suit, Tangent claims that Microsoft "has not been complying fully" with the final judgment that was entered into in the government case in November 2002. That settlement required Microsoft to, among other things, provide other companies with technical documentation needed to interoperate with the Windows desktop operating system.

    "Microsoft has delayed producing usable specifications and its specifications have been inaccurate and incomplete," Tangent said. "Moreover, although Microsoft was required to offer licenses to third parties, the terms of those licenses were too burdensome."

    The suit cites recent disagreements between regulators and Microsoft and also claims that Microsoft's new Windows Vista OS "promises more bundling tying and undocumented interfaces."
    --
    My pics.
  6. Re:The elephant in the corner by Fujisawa+Sensei · · Score: 2, Informative
    why haven't we broken up this one by making the OS open-source and allowing MS to continue as it pleases with its other products (which don't force anyone to use them.)

    The company was broken up. The court then changed its mind on appeal,. No doubt in part to the Attorney Gereral Ashcroft rolling over and saying "the case is without merit". AFTER the conviction.

    --
    If someone is passing you on the right, you are an asshole for driving in the wrong lane.
  7. Re:Outlook? by WhiteWolf666 · · Score: 2, Informative

    Microsoft is welcome to bundle whatever they choose so long as they dont prevent/cripple users from installing products from competing vendors.

    Maybe in some capitalist moral frameworks, yes, but not under U.S. law.
    Bundling by a monopolist is considered "tying". Tying is illegal under the Sherman Anti-trust act.

    Vertical tying is the practice of requiring customers to purchase related products or services from the same company. For example, a company's automobile only runs on its own proprietary gas and can only be serviced by its own dealers. In an effort to curb this, many jurisdictions require that warranties not be voided by outside servicing; for example see the Magnuson-Moss Warranty Act in the United States. More recently, video game consoles run only software licensed by the console manufacturer and use lockout chips to enforce this.

    Microsoft ties together Microsoft Windows, Internet Explorer, and Outlook Express.

    Tying may be the action of several companies, as well as the work of just one firm.

    It was first made potentially illegal in the United States by the Sherman Antitrust Act (section 1) if the firm has market power in the tying good, and a "non-trivial" amount of business is affected by the tying. See International Salt Co. v. United States, 332 U.S. 392 (1947).

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tying

    At issue is not whether or not this is a reasonable law; but whether or not Microsoft has violated it.

    A) Microsoft is a convicted monopolist.
    B) Microsoft ties its products together.
    C) Tying of its products affects a substantial number of businesses
    D) The DoJ settlement did not measurably reduce Microsoft's market power.

    Therefore, a new antitrust case is in order.

    If you disagree, don't argue about the courts; they are just doing their job. Congress will have to pass some legislation either revoking the Sherman AntiTrust act, or specifically exempting Microsoft.

    --
    WhiteWolf666 an exBush supporter. All you new-school,compassionate,save the children Republicans can rot in hell
  8. Re:media player by Isotopian · · Score: 3, Informative

    Actually, the WMV format is far superior to QT when it comes to properly compressing them to a low bitrate. I go out of my way to avoid installing QT (which is very difficult to get without iTunes bundled, isn't that more 'unfair bundling'?) because I don't like it as a player or as a format. Not to say it's bad, it's just not the best.

    --

    It's poetry with a beat behind it! And guns! They're like beatniks with automatic weapons.

  9. Re:media player by brandonbradley · · Score: 3, Informative
    There have been no significant changes to video players since Microsoft arrived on the market. The only company doing innovation in that area is Apple with their Quicktime product and their support of the Sorenson codecs.
    Actually there have been improvements both with the Sorrenson codec as well as the MP4 format. xVid and Divx also come to mind as improvements in that quality of video has improved while comparative file size has decreased. Then there are the new video capabilities of the flash player which can now not only play, record, and stream video, but can also do things like utilize alpha channels to blend with non video content. So innovation is still out there and happening, even if it isn't necessarily evident to most.