Slashdot Mirror


Mozilla To Join EU Suit Against Microsoft

CWmike writes "The European Commission (EC) has granted Mozilla the right to join its antitrust case against Microsoft, a spokesman said Monday. If the charges stick, Microsoft could be forced to change the way it distributes IE, as well as pay a fine for monopoly abuse. Mitchell Baker, Mozilla's chairperson, said in a blog over the weekend that there isn't 'the single smallest iota of doubt' that Microsoft's tying of IE to Windows 'harms competition between web browsers, undermines product innovation and ultimately reduces consumer choice.'"

7 of 422 comments (clear)

  1. Re:How, exactly?!? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Informative

    Well, last I'd heard, Opera was asking for their product to be bundled with Windows, in addition to IE.

    Really? Where did you hear that? Last I heard Opera complained about the abuse and asked the EU to specifically address broken standards. As far as I know they have asked for no specific remedy. A lot of pundits and MS themselves have made comments about forcing MS to bundle Opera as well, but as far as I've heard neither Opera nor the EU have proposed any such thing. Do you have a source?

  2. Re:Huh?! I think I've got a headache. by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 5, Informative

    just the other day they (Mozilla) said that bundling does not boost adoption.... now this. was that a decoy or the man was indeed a bozo?

    Yesterday the personal comments of one Firefox developer/architect were made into a Slashdot story. The comments of one of the actual executives, which said basically the opposite, were ignored. I can see why one might get the wrong idea, but you have to pay attention to the context. Sure, the guy was a bozo, but most of us knew that yesterday.

  3. Re:ultimately reduces consumer choice by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    If it is entirely possible to remove IE from your computer without borking the OS, then yes, it will be something to bring up to the OEMs. If IE MUST be on the computer regardless of the user's or OEM's wishes, then we should continue hitting up Microsoft until they untie the browser from the OS.

    I have IE on my computer. I don't want it there. I can't remove it. Various Microsoft programs insist on launching that damned thing despite OS set preferences for Firefox. Something it would not be able to do if I truly had the freedom of CHOICE rather than the freedom of adding extras. If IE wasn't such a big security risk I wouldn't be nearly as concerned, but microsoft has proven itself to me that it is unable to make a secure application.

  4. Re:ultimately reduces consumer choice by rts008 · · Score: 4, Informative

    No, you for sure don't get it.

    Mozilla is not suing MS. Opera is the one. Mozilla was just added as an 'interested third party', not as a litigant.

    FTFA:

    Mozilla has been granted what's called "interested third party" status in the case, which allows it to submit arguments to the European regulator, to see the confidential statement of objections the EC sent Microsoft last month, and to participate in a face-to-face hearing if Microsoft requests one.

    However, it isn't a complainant in the case. That role goes to Norwegian Web browser Opera, which complained to the EC just over a year ago about Microsoft's practices in the browser market.

    Your whole post makes no sense, has nothing to do with reality, and is nothing but FUD.

    --
    Down With Slashdot BETA!!! I've been around the corner and seen the oliphant; you can only abuse me from your perspecti
  5. Re:Who is John Galt? by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 4, Informative

    I'm sorry, mod me as a troll if you like, but this whole thing reeks of Government putting its nose where it doesn't belong.

    Yeah, that crazy EU government and their enforcing the laws... the same laws we enforced against MS for the same crime which they still haven't stopped committing. Seriously, I hope you're an astroturfer, instead of just an honest someone they've managed to completely mislead.

    The EU tried them a while ago for anti-competitive practices, fined them, and forced them to release a bunch of code.

    Wrong. It forced them to document APIs for communication between two of their products so people making the one that was not Windows on the desktop could compete. They even let them charge for said documentation.

    Microsoft complied. The EU came back again and said it wasn't enough, fined them again, and forced them to release more.

    Actually, MS refused to comply, which is why the EU continued to fine them until they did comply, that is fully document the APIs so others could compete. MS just tried to pull a fast one by releasing incomplete and incorrect APIs and hoping the EU would not call them on it.

    Then you've got the entire EU saying "We recommend you don't use Windows. Our government isn't going to use Windows, either." which is all well and good, they certainly have that liberty.

    Yeah, governments often recommend against doing business with repeat offender criminals, but the EU never said they would not use MS, they are just not a preferred vendor.

    Now you've got them suing based on the fact that MS packages a damn browser with their operating system (the one thing 99.99% of people buy computers for) and its anti-trust, too.

    Wow, you never get tired of being wrong do you? There is no lawsuit. Opera reported a crime. They did not file a lawsuit. The crime they reported was antitrust abuse. The fact that the antitrust abuse happens by way of bundling does not imply bundling is illegal in the general case. Your argument is like claiming someone being charged with murder for shooting someone should be let go, because lots of hunters and target shooters fire guns as well and are not arrested. You're fundamentally failing to comprehend either the crime or the reason for the law and basically being an embarrassment to people who bother to learn about something before spouting off about it.

    Geez, can you leave them alone already?

    Geez, can't they stop committing crimes already? They only have a million lawyers.

    If people want firefox, they can download firefox or opera or anything.

    Irrelevant. It does not mitigate the antitrust abuse.

    If they don't want Windows, there's plenty of free alternatives.

    Irrelevant, MS is not charged with having a monopoly. Having a monopoly is legal.

    Fine, you think their products suck. Don't use them.

    For OEMs the option of not buying Windows to pre-install on computers they sell is not an option. It sucks, but it isn't illegal. Making them take IE too is illegal. Even if I never use Windows or IE, they're still costing me money when I do Web development. They're costing Opera and Mozilla money every day as well, and they're doing so by breaking the law. If I were breaking the law and costing you money would your ignoring that law (the one everyone else has to obey) seem like a reasonable option to you, just because other people have choices? How does that help you?

    But don't hold a gun to their heads and tell them they can't sell a certain product.

    But here's the thing. They can make and sell IE all they want. They can fricking bundle it with MS brand mice. They just can't legally bundle it with Windows and they've been breaking that law and counting on it to make them more money than it c

  6. Re:Am I on Slashdot or some where else? by EvolutionsPeak · · Score: 4, Informative

    What nagging? The first time Internet Explorer starts up and is not the default browser it asks if you want to make it the default browser. Uncheck the "always ask" box and click "no" and it never asks again. I have been doing this for years and never been "nagged". The worst thing that happens is that some programs (non-MS programs even) open sites in IE even when it is not the default browser. If you or anyone can give an example that will cause incessant nagging then please state it, and it should probably be reported as a bug.

    As far as sites not being compatible with non-IE browsers or requiring ActiveX or whatever, that is not a reason to say they are acting unfairly by bundling their browser. They offer an extra feature unique to their browser which comes with their operating system, what is unfair about that? People are perfectly free to not use their OS or their browser.

  7. Re:ultimately reduces consumer choice by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 3, Informative

    No, you for sure don't get it. Mozilla is not suing MS. Opera is the one. Mozilla was just added as an 'interested third party', not as a litigant.

    Actually, you're a little off too. No one is suing anyone. Opera filed a criminal complaint, not a lawsuit. Mozilla is an interested third party in the prosecution. There is no litigant, just prosecutors, the defendant, and victims.