Slashdot Mirror


Microsoft Subpoenas Thrown out of Court

liliafan writes "Following Microsoft's attempt to subpoena documents through US courts, relating to their ongoing anti-trust case in the UK, the judge in California has thrown the case out of court citing: 'As a matter of comity, this court is unwilling to order discovery when doing so will interfere with the European Commission's orderly handling of its own enforcement proceedings.' as his reasoning."

6 of 172 comments (clear)

  1. Judge Dread by Firewalker_Midnights · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Finally someone who was knowledgeable enough in these tech law proceedings, and has a stiff grasp of both local and international law issues stepped up to the plate and knocked a superfluous request out.

    Now, if only we could have this guy ruling on patent cases, things might look a bit better...

    --
    I Lost My Virginity While Waiting for BSD to Compile.
  2. Re:Ah, the backdoor approach. by utlemming · · Score: 4, Insightful

    The answer is quite simple: in this case it is a civil matter in which the United States does not have an interest or juristiction. Microsoft was attempting to use US Courts to get what they couldn't get in European Courts. The best analogy would be having your Mom tell you can't get into the cookie jar so you turn around and ask Dad (at least in my house, we learned that you don't do that because bad things happen) Also, the matter is in European Courts. If Microsoft was attempting to compel an order from a European Court it would be a whole different matter. But Microsoft wants to get into the cookie jar, and so it is asking a US Court to help when European Courts won't allow it. Frankly, I would love to see the European Commision have a hayday with it. While the Commision may not be able to do anything since the attempt happened on US soil and hence the Commision does not have jurisition, it goes to speak rather strongly about Microsofts attitudes and behaviors.

    But as another poster said, your orginional post is a straw-man argument. This is a civil matter that deals with the business laws internationally. It has NOTHING to do with human rights, which by the way are protected by international law. As the world becomes more intermestic (the idea that domestic or international issues have internation or domestic implications, consquences and effects), nations respecting other nation's laws will become more and more important.

    --
    The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
  3. Re:What documents? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 3, Insightful
    How cool! You called the European legal system corrupt! And you offered all manner of evidence showing your point of view!

    Except... wait... you didn't. Not one. You just called it a name and decided you were right.

  4. Re:Does MSFT even sell 200M Euros a day? by IHSW · · Score: 5, Insightful

    I know these are "stupid" questions, on many levels (especially in this venue), but does MSFT even make 200-million Euros a day in sales to the EU? No.
    Does that matter? (No. That was a rhetorical question.)

    That seems like a rediculous amount, no matter how evil MSFT may be. Isn't that more than 2x MSFT world-wide REVENUE, much less, EU PROFIT?
    Where are you getting your numbers? Do you even have sources? Or are you just pulling numbers out of your ass?

    "What if they don't pay?"
    Their assets within the EU will be seized and auctioned off to pay for related debts, treated as though the company were to go bankrupt. The employees of said assets would be left to look elsewhere for companies to remain loyal to, ergo lose their jobs at EU-MSFT.

    What if they said "screw you, I'm going home" and stopped officially selling product in the EU?
    See above, as well as their stock price falling sharply because their stock holders wouldn't like their company to refuse business with an entire continent.

    As much as many do not like MSFT, this stinks of some sort of politicical extortion, plain and simple.
    It has been debated until the cows eventually came home that MSFT deserves this punishment. I don't know how you managed to get modded up to 3, Insightful.

  5. Re:What documents? by Achromatic1978 · · Score: 5, Insightful
    You people being who? Me? I'm not an American, or a European for that matter.

    Microsoft subpoenaed the documents. Competitors said they were irrelevant. The determining justice reviewed those documents, and agreed. Microsoft tried to find out what they were anyway - why on earth should they be able to hunt through confidential documents of a competitor that have been ruled to be irrelevant, just because they're involved in legal action? Discovery is a regulated process, not one of "All your document are belong to us."

  6. Re:Does MSFT even sell 200M Euros a day? by k98sven · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I know these are "stupid" questions, on many levels (especially in this venue), but does MSFT even make 200-million Euros a day in sales to the EU? No.

    Stupid is relying on The Register as a source. It's Euros a day.

    Does that really matter? No. What matters is that the law is enforced. What's your bright idea to get businesses to follow the law then, if not to fine them?

    What if they don't pay?

    Then they can expect even harsher penalties.

    What if they said "screw you, I'm going home" and stopped officially selling product in the EU?

    Then they don't have to follow EU laws. Fine by me.

    As much as many do not like MSFT, this stinks of some sort of politicical extortion, plain and simple.

    Bullshit. Or do you really think foreign companies shouldn't have to follow US laws in their US operations? They do. And there have been antitrust suits against foreign companies in the US. And in case you missed it, Microsoft was found guilty of antitrust violations in the USA too.

    You assert that the thing is "political extortion" without any proof - as if it's obvious that any foreign court which takes action against an American interest must be doing so for purely political reasons. As if the USA had a monopoly on justice and fairness. That's a blindly nationalistic and xenophobic form of reasoning.