Slashdot Mirror
EU Set To Charge Microsoft Over Ruling Breach
New submitter quippe writes in with some bad news for Microsoft. "Microsoft Corp will be charged for failing to comply with a 2009 ruling ordering it to offer a choice of web browsers, the European Union's antitrust chief said on Thursday, which could mean a hefty fine for the company. U.S.-based Microsoft's more than decade-long battle with the European Commission has already landed it with fines totaling more than a billion euros ($1.28 billion). The Commission, which opened an investigation into the issue in July, is now preparing formal charges against the company, EU Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia said."
If they want to really make any pressure on MS.
If I fail to pay the fines to city police, they seize my car until I pay.
The law should be equal to everyone.
Sent as ripples into the electromagnetic field. No single photon has been harmed in the process.
I don't understand why they're doing this. There has been a browser choice screen shipped with it and via windows update for ages now. It stinks of profitteering on the part of the EU. You don't hear them suing the crap out of pharmaceutical companies for a monopoly either.
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2012/07/17/microsoft_ec_browser_choice_fresh_investigation/
So 28 million Windows went out without the choice, and Microsoft got away with it for 17 months. I don't see why you have difficulty understanding it, it all seems pretty simple to me. It's not like they can claim ignorance, they were told by their competitors it wasn't showing the browser choice and they chose to 'investigate' it for a heck of a long time before finally fixing it when Brussels became involved.
It's just Microsoft being Microsoft, they'll never change, just hit them with a big fat non-compliance fooling-nobody fine and move on till the next time (which will be the 3rd time) they do it.
We keep reading that they're being investigated, charged, "fined", but cut to the chase: what actual sums have left Microsoft's account and gone into the Brussels swill trough?
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
$1.28 billion? No problem, Microsoft can win that back with a patent suit or two !
This is slashdot
Ahh thank you sir for pointing that out, I could have been thinking I was looking at gmail or something like that
Some people are really helpful, last time I was about to watch a show, and a guy went completely out of his way, he almost killed himself just to tell me that "It's...." but then the flying circus jingle started
How do you figure? Microsoft clearly violated the terms of the ruling, which resulted in a fine. Are you objecting to
a) the court's interpretation of the law?
b) the anti-monopoly laws in effect in the EU?
c) anti-monopoly laws in general?
I made the mistake of taking that 28 million at face value, but that number comes from Microsoft wishing to downplay what it did.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_7
"On March 4, 2010, Microsoft announced that it had sold more than 90 million Windows 7 licenses.", so when SP1 was introduced it was 90 million.
"On July 12, 2011, the sales figure was refined to over 400 million end-user licenses and business installations"
So when they fixed it they'd shipped 400 million.
So 310 million windows were shipped, and Microsoft is claiming less than 10% market share for Europe? Seriously? They've previously claimed that 35% was Europe giving a number more than 100 million....
FTA:
Market share of Microsoft's Internet Explorer in Europe has roughly halved since 2008 to 29 percent so far this year as it has lost clients mostly to Google's Chrome.
Chrome controls 29.3 percent of the European browsing market, while Mozilla's Firefox has 30.3 percent of the market, according to web research firm Statcounter.
That's 90% of the market equally shared over three browsers. With the other 10% for the rest. Well I'd call that a rather healthy situation, and a great progress from 90%+ for IE.
Browser selection screen or not, the dominance of IE is obviously broken without any other browser becoming dominant, and that I'd say is good. Very good. The next step is a proper html standard, and a standard interpretation/rendering of that standard.
Windows 8 certification of ARM: must not be able to run any other operating system:
MANDATORY: Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot via firmware setup without possession of Pkpriv. Programmatic disabling of Secure Boot either during Boot Services or after exiting EFI Boot Services MUST NOT be possible. Disabling Secure MUST NOT be possible on ARM systems.
Or:
Multiple-convicted monopolist company with assets on a par with the entire EU annual budget, seeks to avoid legal redress by failing to implement agreed-to legal measures (or only implementing them half-assedly) and claim they didn't know, nor bother to check, they were working for several YEARS, after already being fined half a billion Euros and made to implement those measures in the first place (after ANY NUMBER of appeals and legal arguments failed because the evidence was just so overwhelming).
It's all in the spin, really, and it's hard to have sympathy for the convicted monopolist worth more than a lot of EU countries combined, when they are basically here because they can't be bothered to instruct one person within their company to keep an eye on their half-a-billion-pound + expenses mistake and the complementary obligation they were legally required to implement over several years.
If you wanna do business in the EU, you have to stick by EU law, no matter how ridiculous you think it is or how much you disagree with its application. If that's a problem, don't do business with it. And if you don't want a repeat of your half-a-billion-dollar-plus-expenses blatant disregard for that law, maybe you should have one of the many very expensive lawyers, or even just someone involved in implementing the solution, keep an eye on it once a month, say, for the duration of your punishment.
If the fine is the same size, then $1.28B is a small price to pay for the type of money and power that controlling Windows software sales will bring.
You're wasting your time. You're talking about people who are too stupid to download Firefox or Chrome without government involvement.
"The average reporter we talk to is 27 years old......They literally know nothing." - Ben Rhodes
So you are saying they don't have to run a major attack vector just so that they can avoid running a major attack vector? What about when they want to keep their computer secure by using Windows Update; can they avoid using Internet Explorer by using Chrome or Firefox? Can they simply uninstall IE so they it won't run against their wishes at various times? Can they stop Windows from interrupting the Update process and prompting for the inevitable IE updates that attempt to shove Bing down their throat?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
They need the money to bailout Spain...
You would think America would get Apple;Google and Microsoft to pay tax hitting $16 trillion
Why do they need to give the option? It's not like they are charging extra money for a browser... it's free. As are most other browsers.
I guess I never understood why they don't also need to present alternatives to basically every other application that comes with Windows (MSPaint, Calculator, Solitaire, Notepad, etc). Why not?
As a EU citizen I think the EU should stop bothering MS over this browser selectionscreen, otherwise they should also go after Apple for not providing the same option for iOS and MacOSX. MS has already payed enough, and letting 'dumb' users decide which browser to use is one of the most moronic things to do as they have no clue as to which browser is better (they all have their positives and negatives), they propably will select the one that has the nicest icon or name... Stop wasting EU tax money on such stupid things...
Ignoring the EU citizen bit. I personally believe. The EU should have been more vigilant in preventing the Monopoly happening in the first place. The sanction should not be money, but replacing IE as an option from the slection screen :).
I hate eliteist comments like yours attacking moronic(sic) users. The selection screen is a useful way of quickly informing users about the choices available to them.
Microsoft should obviously be penalised for it failing to comply with the 2009 ruling, but the EU should also make sure that Microsoft is paying the right Tax in the EU, and tax loopholes closed if their are any. I am tired of Mega corporations not paying tax.
I'm confused why Apple isn't being sued for the exact same kind of behaviour with their products and ecosystem. I guess Apple must get much larger and then people will open their eyes and realize the are stuck with no alternative as everything they've downloaded over the years is controlled by Apple.
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
Now what about windows and mac app stores with the same lock in??
and the systems that can only run app store apps?
Monopolies are held to a different standard than their minuscule competitors.
They would not "pull licenses" to their customers just because "the EU" is being nasty to them. The licenses have been granted to companies and individuals that have no say in the matter, so why should they be punished?
And where would they sue, anyway? In the European courts where they no longer would be welcome? Microsoft is a legal entity that only exists as a fiat of law: They have no rights other than those granted to them by Governments. If Microsoft were as utterly stupid as you indicate, Europe would just revoke Microsoft's copyright - a Government-granted monopoly, remember - and put Windows into the public domain there, thus making the "illegal" use legal.
Now what about windows and mac app stores with the same lock in??
and the systems that can only run app store apps?
They're not important.
I wish Microsoft would take their Windows and just go home. I'm sure they've already made a bunch of money off of it. See how long a ban in the EU would last.
First Google, for maybe putting their results higher on their product. No Microsoft for putting their product first on their Operating System. And they let Apple keep selling their iCrack devices just because it has rounded corners. Fuck all govts. This is just a big money grab for the EU to try and shore up some holes in their budget. Before long, the US will realize they can do it too.
21st Century Renaissance Man
Last I checked, the European Research Council did work within the European Union, but they weren't operated by the European Union and I don't think you should be attributing credit for funding to the wrong people.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I don't even need to click "Read the rest of this comment..." to know this is yet again, another TL;DR post of APK.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Wrong...
THIS... IS... SPARTA!
*kicks mumblestheclown into the hole of forever*
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Problem is, they're used to doing business in the USA where if you don't like the law you buy a few politicians. This whole idea in the EU of a justice system and having to follow it's decisions is just too foreign a concept for them.
It's pretty easy to refute your "facts", considering that you didn't bother checking most of your links. Going only partway through your list, I found a good chunk of the schools you listed didn't run Windows:
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.pace.edu
F5 BIG-IP Apache/2.2.3 (Red Hat) 28-Sep-2012 198.105.44.27 Pace University
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.ucsc.edu
Linux Apache 28-Sep-2012 128.114.109.5 University of California, Santa Cruz
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.mbc.edu
Linux Apache/2.2.3 (Red Hat) 28-Sep-2012 72.32.6.118 Rackspace Hosting
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.lynchburg.edu
Linux nginx/1.0.15 28-Sep-2012 50.56.4.21 Cloud Loadbalancing as a Service-LBaaS (DFW)
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.uncc.edu
Linux Apache 28-Sep-2012 152.15.219.131 University of North Carolina at Charlotte
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.umt.edu
Linux Apache 28-Sep-2012 150.131.194.46 University of Montana
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=spalding.edu
Linux Apache 13-Sep-2012 216.135.72.163 BLUEGRASS.NET
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.biola.edu
Linux nginx 28-Sep-2012 199.19.144.31 Biola University, Inc.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.immaculata.edu
Linux Apache/2.0.52 (Red Hat) 28-Sep-2012 98.129.134.83 Immaculata University
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.tiu.edu
Linux Apache-Coyote/1.1 28-Sep-2012 38.126.15.210 PSINet, Inc.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.trevecca.edu
Linux Apache 28-Sep-2012 174.129.33.200 Amazon.com, Inc.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.trident.edu
Linux Apache/2.2.3 (CentOS) 14-Jan-2012 216.23.173.234 Jazel, LLC
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.canisius.edu
Linux Apache-Coyote/1.1 28-Sep-2012 138.92.8.121 Canisius College
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.bentley.edu
Linux nginx 28-Sep-2012 184.73.245.212 Amazon.com, Inc.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.scranton.edu
Linux Apache/2.2.3 (Red Hat) 28-Sep-2012 134.198.4.83 University of Scranton
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.emerson.edu
unknown Apache/2.2.9 (Debian) PHP/5.2.6-1+lenny8 with Suhosin-Patch 28-Sep-2012 199.94.80.103 Level 3 Communications, Inc.
http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph?site=www.newpaltz.edu
F5 BIG-IP Apache 28-Sep-2012 137.140.1.48 SUNY College at New Paltz
http://
It was not a ruling. It was a settlement, a contract where Microsoft pledged to comply with certain obligations or get punitive damages. In return an antitrust case was scrapped. Never before such a settlement has been broken. So the EU Commission Competition Commissioner Almunia was quite surprised. And Microsoft quickly admitted they broke the contract and offered an additional deal. So the only relevant question is not how to set the fines. I assume a) Microsoft will need to put some meat on the table, e.g. open source IE, prolong the application time of the settlement b) Damages will be set, up to 10% of their annual turnover. Probably they will keep it below.
. If Microsoft were as utterly stupid as you indicate, Europe would just revoke Microsoft's copyright - a Government-granted monopoly, remember - and put Windows into the public domain there, thus making the "illegal" use legal.
If the EU actually wanted to hurt Microsoft they would enforce those copyrights as harshly as possibly. Microsoft may want to get paid for every copy of windows, but they'd still rather you use a pirated copy of windows than a different OS altogether. If the people in the EU woke up and realized they could function without windows, the rest of the world might find out too, and then microsoft would be in real trouble.
Unfortunately I know that the EU would never consider actually banning windows, and of course microsoft would never pull out of the EU either. most likley MS will get another little slap on the wrist and continue to illegally abuse their monopoly position as they always have.
Everybody makes this mistake. They think Apple competes with Microsoft. They don't. Apple is a hardware company. If Apple sold an OS that ran on other peoples hardware rather than bundling an OS with their hardware, then you could expect them to be sued. Apple even goes so far as to offer Boot Camp so that you can run an entirely different Operating System on their hardware if you would like.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
This is exactly what is needed. I'm sick of the idea that it is impossible to go to a major manufacturer and buy a computer without windows pre-installed. That's the part of the anti-competitive behaviour that should have been dealt with. People don't run windows because it's "better", in any meaningful way it's not, People run windows because it's pre-loaded, it's simple as that.
Bullshit. I just went through the hassle of building, installing, and updating several M$ Server 2008 machines. Trust me. It is a major problem.
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
You don't get it. Microsoft proposed the browser ballot screen themselves and signed a contract where they obliged themselves to provide it or receive punitive damages. That contract was a settlement to a real competition case where competitors complained on grounds of law and had a strong legal case, namely illegal bundling. The Commission was very kind to accept the settlement and didn't expect Microsoft to violate it.
They didn't force Microsoft either. Microsoft signed a contract to do so in order to settle a strong competition case brought forward by competitiors and the Commission let Microsoft get away with it. It is Microsoft's own fault when they don't comply with the ballot screen contract. There is no "ruling", no "order them to". The Commission is not after their money, it is Microsoft which violated their own contractual obligations and faces the damages foreseen in the contract.
Except MS makes more money out of the EU, even after fines, than it does from the US.
"Let's tell an entire continent to fuck off" isn't sensible business in ANY form.
Apple are not a convicted monopolist. Microsoft are. The only market that Apple could conceivably be considered to have a monopoly in is the tablet market, and I don't think charges would stick there. They initially had 100% of the market because they invented[*] it, but Android tablets are getting increasing market share.
[*] Yes I know there were tablets before the iPad, but none of them were anything like as popular as it, because they weren't anything like as good, or as cheap.
We are talking about personal computer Operating Systems here. I forget. What Operating System does Apple sell that runs on non-Apple hardware again?
Guns don't kill people; Physics kills people! - John Lithgow as Dick Solomon on Third Rock From The Sun
Good point.
Oh stop it.. a browser (or mediaplayer) is a basic part of any modern OS. I don't see anyone complain about not being able to select a browser/mediaplayer on iOS/MacOSX or Linux.. Also MS never prevented other companies from releasing their own browser/mediaplayers on windows, while Apple is preventing others from doing that.. So I think they should go after Apple much harder for preventing others from releasing better software.. People should stop bitching, what's next, sueing MS for 'bundling' notepad or wordpad? I don't see Adobe sueing MS for bundling Paint..
I'm confused why Apple isn't being sued for the exact same kind of behaviour with their products and ecosystem.
Because Microsoft has a monopoly on desktop OSes, something like 90%. Apple has no monopoly in any space, for every iPhone sold, there are two Android phones sold. If MS did this with phones they'd be off the hook, because they have no monopoly in that market.
Free Martian Whores!
Yeah, he sort of defines monomania, doesn't he.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
This is what I see. So I guess MS wouldn't have problems doing exactly what they do if everybody wasn't buying their product. It's their fault so many people want to buy their product. OR, if they simply produced expensive hardware and locked down their operating system to only run on their hardware so you had to buy both from them, again it wouldn't be a problem. OR, if Apple had most of the market today (what they hope for in the future), would the Fanbois be able to look so popular or would they be promoting a monopolistic, big-brother, controlling and manipulative company?
jsut athnoer menagiensls ltitle psrhae for you to dcoede. Why do we wtsae our tmie dnoig tihs?
Once anyone has a monopoly on those kinds of systems, you would likely be able to sue them over store policies due to monopoly abuse.
It's easy to care about winning a contest in which you're the only contestant, isn't it.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
I'm a sockpuppet that he created 4 or 5 years before his 'real' account, all so he could bait you with it a decade or so after creating 'Ash-Fox', right.
I kinda like that theory.
Maybe I should update my sig and let everyone else in on the fun.
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
Actually, after giving this some thought, fuelled with some soothing green tea with mandarin orange, I'd like to change my mind.
Can I be a sockpuppet for this guy, instead?
Thanks!
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
He's so tense about all of this, it's amazing.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.