Microsoft Accuses European Union of Collusion

GarbagePailKid wrote to mention the news that Microsoft has filed a formal complaint alleging that the EU colluded with company rivals and hid critical documents during the EU regulation hearings. According to Microsoft: "While the documents provided do not include the direct correspondence between the commission and its technical experts, they show that the commission, the trustee, and Microsoft's adversaries were secretly collaborating throughout the fall of 2005 in a manner inconsistent with the commission's role as neutral regulator and the Trustee's role as independent monitor..."

Comments

This Just In:

[TripMaster Monkey]

Emperor Palpatine Accuses Jedi Council Of Collusion!

Film at 11!

MS blames everyone else.

[yagu]

This is more of the same. Microsoft doesn't seem to have enough fingers to point for blame, of course, except for at anyone but themselves.

A previous slashdot thread discussed Microsoft's "published" documents whereby Microsoft, unsuccessful in their attempts to win over the European Union, instead published their documentation and responses, trying to drum up public support for their ostensible compliance.

Now Microsoft wants to blame the EU and other companies for colluding against them. Poppycock! There would be almost no other way to define the complaint... it basically is about other companies, and Microsoft's tactics in that marketplace. Yes, the EU plays the heavy here, but it is not in cahoots with the other companies.

Microsoft was asked to provide API documentation, they instead offered to license their source (with restrictions), which is in no way the same thing and is an inappropriate substitute.

Of course the EU is going to be discussing this with other companies -- the other companies are the ones injured in this action, and their observations are key in determining real Microsoft compliance.

Re:MS blames everyone else.

[bigwigeconomist]

Of course Microsoft blames everyone else.... Everyone else blames Microsoft. Regardless of the merits of the EU's case against MS, it's important that the trial be fair and appropriately handled and, if Microsoft has reasonable evidence to the point, they have the right to claim damages.

Re:MS blames everyone else.

[replicant108]

What's interesting about this is MS's increasingly aggressive stance towards the Commission. There seems to be some tension between the stance taken by the Commission on software patents (where McCreavy in particular is seen to be strongly influenced by MS) and these anti-monopolistic actions.

One wonders if an antagonistic relationship will be beneficial to our favourite monopolist in the long run... Is this a sign of desperation or of arrogance?

Re:MS blames everyone else.

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I've read that the problem is the EU is failing to disclose specifics on EXACTLY what kind of documentation is acceptable.

The EU asked for documentation that was complete enough that other companies could code to all the same interface that MS does as judged by several previously agreed upon parties. The first of those parties rejected the initial offering saying it was not usable or up to industry standards. Seeing as this person is someone MS picked to judge this, I don't see how they can find fault with his findings.

Since it would be illegal to publish all the communication in between MS and the EU council none of us can know for certain what is going on, but I think most of us can make some pretty good guesses. MS wants to provide the minimum available information to convince the EU that they have given them what they need. They probably don't have good info documenting this and instead of making it they gave them broken docs and then tried to rope them into an alternative to giving them the docs.

With hundreds of millions of dollars on the line you'd think they could hire some people to exhaustively document the APIs, and you'd be right. The problem is MS does not really want to do that because then they might have to compete on even ground for the server space and that is a fight they can't win with their currently inferior and more expensive product. So they delay and spread FUD while trying to pay off the right people. Even if they lose and have to pay the fines it might still be a good business move for them. The fines are a tiny portion of the profit from their monopoly in the EU and extending that into the server market illegally as they are now doing is a good way to protect that monopoly and expand it.

Gasp! Shock! Horror!

[rewt66]

So let me see if I have this right: Microsoft has been required to publish specifications for it's protocols so that other people can make the same OS calls as Microsoft apps can make. The point of the documentation is that it be useful to other companies. So in the process of determining whether Microsoft has actually produced documentation that meets the requirements, the EU checks with other companies! Oh, the horror of collusion!

Give me a break, Microsoft.

Re:Outcome

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

I'd like for Microsoft to win this, be eligible to sue the EU for several billion dollars more than what the EU can get off Microsoft, and then all sides play by the rules for the rest of the debacle.

What the hell are you talking about? MS built their business model around intentionally breaking the laws and once convicted of that are trying to avoid complying with the punishment the courts handed down. And they're doing the same thing in the US, where the DOJ appointed "watchdogs" have reported that MS has also failed to comply with what amounted to a slap on the wrist. It's as if you shoot someone, get convicted, but only given six months probation and a $500 fine because you pay off the judge, and then you don't even fulfill your probation terms.

The "rules" in this situation are the laws which MS is continuing to break and making a bundle doing so. They need to be broken up into multiple companies so this crap stops.

Truly amazing

[Anonymous Coward]

First they refuse to comply with the law. Then they refuse to comply with the judgement against them for breaking the law. Then they publicly agree to comply with the judgement against them for breaking the law, but don't ever begin to actually comply. Then they do a bunch of stuff unrelated to the judgement and complain that they're still being expected to comply with the judgement against them for breaking the law. Then they accuse the people judging them of breaking the law.

Microsoft is more powerful than governments, and the governments don't seem much to care.

Re:Isn't all forms of government

[99BottlesOfBeerInMyF]

Suing microsoft is about the dumbest thing in the world with all of the problems societies across the world face. Tax dollars and legislative time should be better spent on real issues not internet explorer and windows media.

The EU is not suing Microsoft. They are overseeing MS's punishment for breaking the law. You might as well argue "tax dollars should not be spent collecting fines from convicted litterers. Just because we went to the expense of trying them and finding them guilty there is no reason we should waste time actually getting the money from them or making sure they do their community service."

Microsoft intentionally broke the law for profit. They are still doing it. They were convicted of it in a number of jurisdictions. You don't think they should be punished for that? You don't think they should have to obey the laws? You don't think something should be done to discourage them from doing it again?

Re:Known Fact?

[penix1]

Which is pure BS. When MS got ruled against in the US the first thing they did was focus on the judge and the court to find a reason to water down the "final settlement". They are doing the same thing here....

Look at the Wookie!

B.

Re:You forget ...

[AJWM]

Slashdot has always been anti-MS, often regardless of actual merit.

Probably because of the number of slashdotters (vs the general public) who actually understand the industry, and/or work in it.

The fact that Microsoft is apparently incapable of documenting their interfaces is symptomatic of the development "methodology" within MS, and the quality of their product (bugs? viruses? etc) is another symptom. The misery that their whale dreck has caused many said slashdotters is the main reason for said anti-MS sentiment -- and actually that has everything to do with actual merit.