Slashdot Mirror


EU Says Microsoft Still Not Compliant

what about writes "News.com is reporting that the European Union still doesn't consider Microsoft in compliance with its anti-trust ruling." From the article: "Should the Commission issue a final decision against Microsoft, the software giant would face a retroactive fine of $2.36 million a day for the period between Dec. 15 and the date the final decision is issued. The Commission may then take additional steps to extend the daily fine until Microsoft complies with the order. The Commission's letter is just the latest action it has taken in the closely watched antitrust case. "

27 of 339 comments (clear)

  1. Is 2.36 million a day by RedHatLinux · · Score: 4, Interesting

    enough of a fine to make breaking the law an unprofitable method of doing business? I doubt it, given how much money Microsoft has saved up.

    1. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Microsoft had really better tone itself down for the EU. The EU's not going to let some big American company get pushy, and with the recent news of OSS in Europe, as well as the fact Apple is now #1 in the UK education market (passing Dell at #2), someone at Microsoft needs to just comply with what the EU wants. It's not worth the consequences. Tech is fickle, and just because Microsoft has a huge monopoly now doesn't mean it won't become irrelevant in a month.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    2. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by Overly+Critical+Guy · · Score: 3, Interesting

      It's not about money, it's about losing ground to other companies who are quite happy to play friendly with the EU. Paying big fines wouldn't sit well with shareholders either.

      --
      "Sufferin' succotash."
    3. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by mormop · · Score: 4, Interesting

      From Gartner:

      Apple has confirmed that it's taken the number one spot in the western European education market.
      Apple's education market share in western Europe is now 15.2 per cent, relegating Dell, with 14.7 per cent, to second place.

      If Apple owns 15.2% of the EU market that leaves 84.8% that are running Windows minus the small percentage that are running Linux. It's all very well putting Apple in the number 1 PC vendor spot but the Windows share is Dell plus any number of other Intel/MS manufacturers plus schools that build their own and use site wide volume licences etc.

      Without wishing to piss on the Apple parade, MS are still the number 1 OS in education. Believe me, I wish it were otherwise as I've spent some time putting Linux/Samba in place of a school's NT network and I soooooooo want to run Linux clients but there's just so much curriculum software for Windows that can't be replaced with what's available for Linux/MAC.

      On the other hand, I don't see how MS can win this one. The validity of their licences in the EU only holds because EU law supports them. If MS take the piss it only needs shrink wrapped licences to be declared invalid and MS are bolloxed.

      The EU could also change competition law and make the max daily fine 10 million or 10 billion. If MS threaten to pull out of Europe you can look at it two ways, 1 - a disaster that could hurt the European economy or 2 - an opportunity for the birth of a whole new European software industry. OK so start the flames but at the end of the day there are many people who have stomped out of their workplace convinced that the company that's treated them so badly will suffer only to find that after a short period of readjustment the company forgets they even existed.

      In the event of MS exiting Europe you can expect to see many of today's Linux geeks being tomorrows training company millionaires. Roll it on, that's what I say.

      --
      Hmmmmmm..... Deep fried and look like Squirrel.
    4. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by diegocgteleline.es · · Score: 3, Interesting

      MS are still the number 1 OS in education

      I'm not shocked, here in Spain (and everywhere) the public schools are teaching windows/office on computer classes to all kids.

      I mean, public schools are wasting lots of millions in making people learn microsoft-only technologies, and Microsoft is not wasting a single pennie on educating them.

      "Public schools - monopolize yourself (tm)"

    5. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by Device666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I think the more arrogant Microsoft is, thinking it can get way with this (like they might have in America), the more the risk for them that they overplay their hand. It might surprise Microsoft when it is banned from Europe if they would play it on the hardway. The EU has already a "free software first" policy and Europeans have a lot of interests in their own software industry which they will not let it hijack by Microsoft, this is the reason for the EU to start with this fine anyway. We'll see what comes next. It might get ugly ;-)

    6. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by rtb61 · · Score: 3, Interesting
      Microsoft has money, the government has law, microsoft's money only last a long as the government acknowledges it's existince or until a governemtn legislates to take it.

      Microsoft certainly can effectively use it's money as a weapon against other private companies and it certainly can gain a lot of influence with some goverments around the world, however when it comes to other governments it must toe the line just like the corner store or suffer the consequences.

      It has already pushed to far, behaved like an ugly American company, all it can do now is tone down it's defence and basically shut up and take what is coming. Microsoft is to stubborn to do that and will instead continue pushing and make more nonsence demands and end up doing nothing but creating a more hostile EU and further aggravate the court.

      --
      Chaos - everything, everywhere, everywhen
    7. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by swillden · · Score: 2, Interesting
      That will negatively affect stock prices, hence affect Microsoft's ability to operate, compete, etc.

      I'm curious about this statement. Isn't it backwards? Why should stock price have any influence on a companies ability to operate or compete?

      The statement is mostly nonsense, as you suspect.

      The current stock price only affects two things: The company's ability to raise more money by selling more stock (keep in mind that most stock trading is *not* the company selling stock, but rather stockholders exchanging stock that the company sold long ago) and the investors' satisfaction level. The first only affects the company if it needs to raise cash in order to expand. The second only affects the company when it gets bad enough that the stockholders vote to force changes in management.

      I really hate the stock market - it's so fickle and unrepresentative of reality, and just encourages market dominance and diversification.

      It's like democracy: it's a terrible system, but all the others are worse.

      --
      Note to ACs: I usually delete AC replies without reading them. If you want to talk to me, log in.
    8. Re:Is 2.36 million a day by chris_7d0h · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Well, in Europe right now, there is a big conversion going on towards GNU/Linux.
      I've personally been involved with the switch of three government organizations in two countries on the server side and one on the desktop. From colleagues in other countries (esp. Germany) they are succeeding to migrate to a better platform even faster.

      As more people become accustomed to alternative platforms and applications, they tend to use them at home as well. Nothing substitutes learning like the massive hands on experience at work or in schools.

      Would MS be forced to exit the EU, it would probably be under a grace period suitable for an accelerated program of rolling out alternative platforms and tools. Not over night, so I would not be worried.

      --
      In a society that believes in nothing, fear becomes the only agenda ~ Bill Durodié
  2. May be risky, but... by DrEldarion · · Score: 1, Interesting

    EU wants to play hardball? If they're smart, Microsoft could REALLY play this off to their advantage, making themselves look like a victim and getting the EU to back down.

    Stop selling products in Europe.
    Deny tech support to companies/users in Europe.
    Buy advertising stating why they're pulling out of the market.

    Make sure that each step of the way, you tell a sob story about how the EU is making it impossible to exist in that market, therefore you're pulling out. Can you imagine the backlash as suddenly no companies can get support, or no users can buy a computer with Windows installed?

    Once the people get angry, I'm sure the officials would change their minds real quick.

    1. Re:May be risky, but... by A+beautiful+mind · · Score: 3, Interesting

      "Stop selling products in Europe."

      Yay! I'd actually be very happy about that decision. Anyone who uses windows for home mostly pirates it here, but the government would be forced to not buy the overpriced Windows any more (The government here also bought windows licenses for everyone in higher education - they could axe that too!).

      Hurray for EU!

      --
      It takes a man to suffer ignorance and smile
      Be yourself no matter what they say
    2. Re:May be risky, but... by DataCannibal · · Score: 5, Interesting

      Deny tech support to companies/users in Europe.

      yes, imagine the backlash as thousands of companies in Europe start suing Microsoft for breach of contract when MS refuses them support. That ought to go down well with the shareholders.

      +5 insightful, fuck off! This guy has no idea what he's talking about.

      --
      No but, yeah but, no but...
    3. Re:May be risky, but... by McGiraf · · Score: 3, Interesting

      That would be more that risky, it would be suicide.

      Everybody in EU would start looking for altenatives to Windows and some of them would even find better solutions than what the had with windows.

      And for those who would'nt find an avaiable replacement that meets their requiement there would be hundreads of companies in EU that pops up to provide them with one.

      That would be very good for the EU , open source software and Apple and realy bad for Microsoft

    4. Re:May be risky, but... by bobs666 · · Score: 2, Interesting
      I would hope the EU wants MS to do all of this:
      • Stop selling products in Europe.
      • Deny tech support to companies/users in Europe.
      • Buy advertising stating why they're pulling out of the market.

      IF the EU want to make Open source solutions more palatable, then this is Yet another way to stop the population from paying the MS tax.

      Once the people get angry, I'm sure the officials would change their minds real quick.

      People should not get angry, just stop being so simply, when there are alternatives. And don't forget IBM is all ready there to support the change. Check it out

    5. Re:May be risky, but... by Voltageaav · · Score: 2, Interesting

      If they do that, it opens room for Open Source and other competitors to move in. It would be kind of risky for them to do that. I think at this point, they have more to lose by not complying than trying to fight it. $2.36 Million a day. They may have tons of moeny, but that adds up quick and they have other investments to think about as well. As of today, that's 200 million and counting. With legal proceedings lasting as long as they do, this could turn out to be quite a big fine.

      --
      Someone save me from this sanity.
    6. Re:May be risky, but... by Billly+Gates · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Like Microsoft would do that?

      I agree that it would hurt Microsoft's image in Europe but it would also hurt the EU's image and many politicians would lose their job. Offices need Microsoft and have proprietary formats for data from win32 specific apps. THey can't just switch.

      These offices pay in the form of lobbying particular politicians to office. If the EU's anticompetitive commision grows any balls then heads will roll and people will be fired until it finds employees friendly to Microsoft. Just look at what happened in the US when ms lobbied heavily when it was on trial?

      Either way its suicide for the EU and Microsoft just may win. It will have a black eye in the short term but in the long term it will get what it wants by playing chicken.

    7. Re:May be risky, but... by Austerity+Empowers · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Actually this would be great for the US. Let European corporations figure out how to effectively switch away from MS, and then we can just swoop in and adopt the finished product.

    8. Re:May be risky, but... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      If Microsoft stops selling their products in the EU, there will immediately open a gray market with (legal!) imports from eastern Europe, or the US and Canada. The only ones who'd suffer would be the users in countries where the local language isn't spoken anywhere outside the EU, because they would proabaly not be able to source their localized Windows/Office anywhere else, but I think that would be the minority. English for UK and IE is available in US and CA, french in CA and CH, spanish and portugese in various south american countries (there might be differences...) german and italian from CH. Essentially this may leave the netherlands, belgium, denmark, poland, finland, sweden, greece, hungary, slovakia, slovenia and the baltic states without access to localized Microsoft Software, which isn't even 1/3 of the population. For some of them it may be quite painful as Open Source Software may have only rudimentary support for some of the less common languages.

      Additionally, Microsoft can't just close their local subsidiaries from one day to the next, they'll have to continue paying salaries and rent for their employees if they ever plan to restart their operations (and still for months or years even if they didn't). Furthermore Microsoft itself is bound by contracts to supply their distributors, all the large computer manufacturers as well as larger companies with support and software for years.

      They can't just stop, and even if they tried, it would be extremely expensive, and they wouldn't really achieve anything.

    9. Re:May be risky, but... by daniel23 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      Well, I doubt this, strongly.
      A public outcry in Europe to back an US monopolist trying to strongarm a European institution? You must be dreaming!

      As soon as this issue comes to the headlines and frontpages, MS would draw all the widespread critique of US hegemonialism and cowboy politics on itself. And this is not limited to single nations or leftwing circles at all but is a view shared by many in the upper ranks of corporate Europe as well.
      And there are lots of anti-US sentiments in latency which would tend to manifest themselves if such an issue was driven to a confrontation.
      To become a symbol of "typical American" is a pr disaster and I do not think MS will offer themselves as a scapegoat like that.
      In fact, one of the factors that allowed MS to grow strong here was the emphasis they put on localisation. And this was not invented in Redmond, Wash., it was an issue put forward by European branches, and Redmond listened, and took the advice.
      Of course this is only speculation on my part but I wouldn't be surprised to learn they still know to listen to the locals and know better than to risk a full scale open confrontation.

      --
      605413? Yes, it's a prime.
  3. Budget Filler? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Interesting

    I'm all for insuring Microsoft plays fair but come on, it seems like the EU is more interested in making an extra 30 or 40 million than making sure the consumer is protected.

    Several of the US states (CA in particular) seem to see Microsoft as a way of making some extra money as well.

    If the Linux bubble proved anything it is Windows is actually a pretty good product and despite thousands of Linux distros and tens of millions of dollars being spent over the last 5 years the average person still uses Windows.

    There are plenty of options today, Mac Mini's are available and affordable, Powerbook prices will be coming down, there are tends of very mature desktop Linux distros.

    In today's world the computer user has plenty of choices, you shouldn't penalize a company because they choose to use the major player. There is no question MS should be penalized if they break the law but we shouldn't fine a company just because they are the major player or because they can afford it.

    Just another example of politics.

    1. Re:Budget Filler? by Decaff · · Score: 2, Interesting

      So let me get this straight the EU wants Microsoft to Document there propietary protocols because Microsoft does a great job of integrating all of there technologies, and making it easy for Admins and users alike to use them.

      No, that is not why. The reason is that Microsoft has a sufficiently large proportion of desktop systems (usually through bundling arrangements with PC companies) that, if it keeps these proprietary protocols private, it can force sales of server systems above the level that might be sold if others could provide adequate alternatives.

      This is the point - this is using a monopoly in one market (desktop OSes) to gain an advantage in another (server OSes).

      There is nothing wrong in itself with having a total or near-monopoly in one market, if that is obtained by fair means. The legal problem is if you use that position to block competition in other markets.

      Correct me if I'm wrong but couldn't Novell, or Red Hat, or Unix, Mac all try there hand at integrating all of there services and products just like Microsoft. The problem is Linux, Unix, and Mac cannot compete with Microsoft because they do not integrate there technologies as well.

      Unix and Mac have always had extremely well integrated technologies. I work with companies that have Linux on both desktops and servers and they work wonderfully well together.

      But that is not the point. This is a minority situation. These companies need to be able to integrate with Windows on the desktop to compete. The EU says that Microsoft's dominance of the desktop along with the fact that it keeps certain protocols private and undocumented prevents this.

  4. Re:Wrist-slapping by tshak · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Still just a slap...

    No, it's still extortion. I know the typical /. mantra is that MS did evil by adding features to their OS without adding cost. I know that people believe it's black-and-white antitrust for giving huge discounts to OEM's for volume license agreements in which all machines sold had Windows instead of some niche OS that has zero relevance to the OEM's marketshare. But the reality is that governemnt should never have this much heavy handed control over business, and the EU is essentially stealing US dollars on the backs of the underdogs. Do you really think the consumer or BeOS will get a dime of this? Please. Keep the government out of this. IBM switching to Linux and Apple taking on the home market are all I need to see that we have a healthy and competitve marketplace without government intervention.

    --

    There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
  5. Re:The real problem with this is... by rewt66 · · Score: 2, Interesting
    For the EU citizens, the point is not that the fines will lower their taxes. The point is that the fines will force MS to publish the specifications of their functions and/or protocols, so that other outfits (commercial and free) can write stuff that works as well with Windows as Microsoft's own stuff does.

    This way MS can't do the "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run" business to anybody ever again. This means that they have to actually compete, rather than driving app vendors out of business with OS tricks. This means more choice and lower prices for EU computer customers. That's the point.

    And if MS refuses to pay, then the EU can start grabbing MS assets in Europe - like maybe the Irish operation that MS uses to hide money from US taxes? Or is Ireland not part of the EU? (Should check, but I'm lazy.) The EU could also block MS from selling in the EU, which, since it's about a third of their business, and MS's annual income is about $40 billion, would amount to about a $13 billion fine. No, I think Microsoft will pay, grumbling loudly to the press all the while...

  6. Re:What more do they want? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    It may be because "prints all prime numbers" is much more easier to understand than
    $_=1;(1x++$_)=~/^(11+)\1+$/?1:print$_,$/while$_

  7. Industry requirements for documentation? by tsa · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Microsoft, however, contends it has gone above and beyond industry requirements for documentation.

    I never knew there was such a thing as industry requirements for documentation.

    --

    -- Cheers!

  8. The AC's right by Jesus_666 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Microsoft uses an internal API that is not openly documented. That's uncompetitive, which happens to be illegal when you're as big as Microsoft. What is the EU going to do in oeder to get Microsoft to comply? Issue a $100M fine? How cute. The only thing that might ever get Microsoft to cave in is constant pressure, which is what the EU are applying. And it's not like Microsoft provided a full documentation and then the EU said "we're not going to take it, give us more". An independent company checked the documentation and decided that it's nowhere near adequate.

    If you don't think that a corporation should be fined more than once ever you can write to your MP.

    --
    USE HOT GRITS WITH STATUE OF NATALIE PORTMAN (NAKED AND PETRIFIED)
  9. Re:The real problem with this is... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

    Try with "confiscation of all present and future revenues originating from within the EU", to begin with until the fines are paid. That would be about 30% of Microsofts incomes.

    If that doesn't do it because revenues dries up or customers losing patience with this obnoxious, lawbreaking company, an outright ban on making business within the EU could be the final step on a ladder of escalating punishments.

    Remember, the power of governments is absolute, since they are the legal bodys of the people. (More or less, agreed, but the theory goes that way - which is what matters here.) A governement can do *anything* including declaring Microsoft an illegal organisation, make being employed by them a crime you could go to jail for, employées could get their income treated the same way as if they'd got it from the mafia... That would be the extreme, but I guess you get the point.