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. "
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.
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.
Still just a slap...
/. 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.
No, it's still extortion. I know the typical
There is no longer anything that can be done with computers that is nontrivial and clearly legal. -- Paul Phillips
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...
It may be because "prints all prime numbers" is much more easier to understand than
$_=1;(1x++$_)=~/^(11+)\1+$/?1:print$_,$/while$_
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.
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!
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)
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.