EU Antitrust Troubles Continue For Microsoft

Julie188 writes "Opera Software's year-old antitrust complaint against Microsoft took another step toward being vindicated, and the Oslo-based browser maker can't help crowing over the European Commission's decision. Opera had filed a complaint with the EC in December, 2007, contending that Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer with Windows violated antitrust rules. Yesterday, the EC sent a 'Statement of Objections (SO)' to Microsoft with a preliminary finding that bundling IE with Windows does indeed constitute an antitrust abuse. Microsoft has eight weeks to plead its case and change the EC's mind, an unlikely outcome if ever there was one. Opera's CEO said, 'On behalf of all Internet users, we commend the Commission for taking the next step towards restoring competition in a market that Microsoft has strangled for more than a decade.'"

Comments

Re:But what about...?

[betterunixthanunix]

In all likelihood, Microsoft would not actually remove IE, they would just create a registry key that enabled or disabled the web browser functionality. Such a key might already exist, put in place just in case the US government demanded that they remove IE from Windows.

Choice of alternatives at first run

[Coopjust]

IIRC the way Windows XP N was in Europe was that the user was presented with a choice of several non Microsoft media players at first run.

Nobody actually bought N (well, no OEMs, I'm sure a few people did out of principle). My guess is Microsoft tries to offer that as a combined product/SKU with the "no media player" editions and, failing that, it'll get it's own SKU.

Re:How?

[Pinckney]

A Browser will be bundled with virtually all preinstalled systems by the OEM.

Re:But what about...?

[Snowblindeye]

Removing IE breaks a lot of functionality in XP, so I doubt they can simply have bundled and unbundled product lines

As other posts pointed out, it's not clear if that's even true. If it is, they can always remove the the browser application, while leaving the browser components in.

But there might be another option. Instead of removing IE, they could bundle other browsers, or an installer that will get other browsers, into the default windows install.

You don't need a browser to download

[similar_name]

Why does everyone think you need a browser to download something. It's not like HTTP is a protocol made for downloading files.How about FTP, p2p, or an add/remove programs that actually adds programs.

It doesn't have to be hard. I cannot believe so many people on slashdot actually think you need a browser to download a file. A lot of times a browser uses FTP anyway to download something. Now I will agree that most people have become accustomed to having a browser pre-installed. I'll even agree that it can be useful. But it absolutely is not necessary for downloading.

Re:You don't need a browser to download

[Serious Callers Only]

Your grandmother will buy a computer with a bundled OS, with a web browser included (Windows, Linux, OS X, whatever).

What should be questioned here is the underhand practice of secret OEM contracts, which force OEMs to accept exactly the bundle that MS dictates is acceptable. For example they're not allowed to bundle other browsers. Those same contracts forbid bundling another operating system like Linux with MS products, etc etc. While I understand the reasoning for MS to want to control their distribution and the software that goes with it, but they have forfeited that right by their persistent use of it for anti-competitive ends.

If OEMs are allowed to bundle their choice of browser, and remove the built in IE exec (leaving the rendering libraries in place for any other apps that use it), everyone (apart from a certain anti-competitive monopolist) would be happy.

Microsoft is not "pretty much a de facto monopoly"

[Tibor the Hun]

From a ruling in 2001, they are certainly a monopoly, and have abused that status.
Link.

Gawdamit

[Almahtar]

And I have mod points...

People are drastically missing the point here. Nobody's punishing Microsoft because they're Microsoft, and nobody's saying you can't bundle a browser with an OS.

The facts are these:
1. You can't leverage a monopoly in another market.
2. Web browsers and operating systems are separate markets.
3. Microsoft has the monopoly on Operating Systems.
4. Microsoft leverages their Windows monopoly to further their browser market share.

So nobody is saying Microsoft can't bundle a browser - they just have to provide options. Make it so you can choose your browser on install, make it so the OEM can choose a browser to bundle with default installs, whatever. Some sort of choice. You can bundle fifty browsers if you want. Just don't bundle your own and only your own.

As of now the problem isn't that Microsoft is bundling a browser, it's that they're bundling only their browser and offering no options to anybody.

Re:Leave the DLLs, I say.

[init100]

I have an idea. Let's go and sue Linux distributions for bundling free and open source browsers with it, because it wrecks the market for my $40 closed source browser!

Sure, go ahead. Daniel Wallace tried that a couple of years ago, with a very similar argument. He claimed that he wanted to sell his own operating system, and that the GPL amounted to price fixing at zero, and thus Linux was hindering him from selling his own OS.

In short, the court didn't like that argument. He tried to amend his complain several times, but those amended complaints didn't fly either. But if you feel like paying for nothing, go ahead and sue.