Slashdot Mirror


Did Google Tip Off EU About Microsoft Browser Ballot?

Dupple writes with a story about the latest in the Google-Microsoft feud. "The tired spat between Google and Microsoft just got a lot more interesting after reports that the search giant tipped off European authorities to antitrust concerns, a tip that will now cost the Windows-maker nearly a billion dollars. When news of the fine levied by the European Union's competition watchdog broke on Wednesday, nobody was too surprised that the European Commission was punishing Microsoft for bullying consumers. But with a recent headline-stealing dispute between the Redmond, Washington company and Google, it's competitor down in Mountain View, California, bloggers got curious. Early Wednesday evening, The Wall Street Journal's Tom Gara wondered, 'Did Google Snitch?' According to a Financial Times report published a few minutes later, the answer is yes."

187 comments

  1. Obvious troll by AmiMoJo · · Score: 5, Insightful

    This story is an obvious troll. There was no need to "tip off" the EU, it was plainly obvious to everyone the browser ballot disappeared and the EU obviously monitors compliance with its rulings.

    Furthermore when did â500m before "nearly a billion dollars"? Someone can't do maths.

    --
    const int one = 65536; (Silvermoon, Texture.cs)
    SJW, n: "Someone I don't like, and by the way I'm a fuckwit" - AC
    1. Re:Obvious troll by kthreadd · · Score: 1

      Are the N SKUs still available? Never seen them.

    2. Re:Obvious troll by Bert64 · · Score: 3

      It's quite ridiculous to claim data to be "private" when you are broadcasting it unencrypted via wifi...

      --
      http://spamdecoy.net - free throwaway anonymous email - avoid spam!
    3. Re:Obvious troll by MortenMW · · Score: 1

      They still are, at least in MSDN and ActionPack, but I don't think I have ever seen it in retail or actually running at an end-users computer

    4. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      It's quite ridiculous to require an explicit listing of browsers on a computer

    5. Re:Obvious troll by Cenan · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And yet it isn't closer.

      --
      ... whatever ...
    6. Re:Obvious troll by Xest · · Score: 4, Insightful

      That and so what if Google did tip them off?

      Microsoft has been paying millions to lobby EU staff and politicians to attack Google over non-issues, that's far worse than Google pointing out to the EU that Microsoft was in breach of it's obligations as a result of the investigation against them.

      I assume the nearly a billion dollars thing comes from the exchange rate as I believe the figure you quote is euros no?

    7. Re:Obvious troll by Raumkraut · · Score: 5, Informative

      Not only that, but the article linked provides no actual background to how it is "known" that Google "snitched" - just an unsourced quote.
      A little digging indicates that the quote comes from a Financial Times article (registration required). Here are the relevant paragraphs:

      Brussels punished Microsoft for failing to give at least 15m consumers a choice of web browser - a violation of a voluntary antitrust pact that was spotted and raised by Google and Opera, according to several people familiar with the case.

      The US software group was left to police its own compliance and Mr Almunia said the lapse was brought to his attention by a Microsoft rival. According to people involved, Google and Opera informally provided the tip-off and helped investigators.

    8. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, they're all available even through Windows 8. Also it wasn't media center, it was actually the core media player.

    9. Re:Obvious troll by lxs · · Score: 4, Insightful

      They didn't get the fine for the offense itself. They had a suspended sentence hanging over them for earlier abuses and they broke the restrictions imposed on them for that sentence.

      When you steal a bar of chocolate you don't automatically end up prison, but you do when you already have been sentenced to a suspended prison sentence.

    10. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Because no one cared but the EU had to "do something"

    11. Re:Obvious troll by Bearhouse · · Score: 3, Informative

      I think you're incorrect on the first part. From the linked FT article:

      "The US software group was left to police its own compliance and Mr Almunia [EU competition supremo] said the lapse was brought to his attention by a Microsoft rival. According to people involved, Google and Opera informally provided the tip-off and helped investigators"

      Another fun snippet:

      "The episode was cited as a reason for giving Steve Ballmer, chief executive, only half his potential bonus last year."

      Cry me a river.

    12. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't need to be. There was no comparison between those.

    13. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We use Windows 7 N at work. Nice to be able to install the video player one prefers, without having to fight Windows Media Player.

      N only gets rid of WMP, though. The version without IE is called K, which I haven't tried. Being a web development company, we need to be able to test in IE.

    14. Re:Obvious troll by AK+Marc · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It was essentially a penalty for breaking the law earlier, and they failed to live up to their parole terms, then whine that Google told on them.

    15. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I think you may have one too many sentences in your sentence sentence.

    16. Re:Obvious troll by hedleyroos · · Score: 4, Funny

      Give it a month :)

    17. Re:Obvious troll by Gadget_Guy · · Score: 4, Funny

      We use Windows 7 N at work. Nice to be able to install the video player one prefers, without having to fight Windows Media Player.

      In what way do you have to fight WMP? You can set the default player by file type (and all video players give you the option to make their program the default). Plus you can go into "Turn Windows features on or off" and remove Windows Media Player completely in standard Windows 7.

      You can probably do the same thing in Windows 8 by moving the mouse to four seventeenths of the way down the screen near the left side (right side in the sourthern hemisphere) and draw six anti-clockwise circles.

    18. Re:Obvious troll by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      561m Euro = 734m U.S. Dollars, which is almost closer to a billion than to 500m.

      Well, if you're rounding up to the nearest billion, then $1 is "almost a billion dollars".

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    19. Re:Obvious troll by dietdew7 · · Score: 1

      I think it's the precision. They are rounding to the nearest whole billion. 0.7 rounds up to 1.

    20. Re:Obvious troll by Threni · · Score: 2

      > plainly obvious to everyone the browser ballot disappeared and the EU obviously
      > monitors compliance with its rulings

      Wasn't it missing for 14 months?

    21. Re:Obvious troll by bLanark · · Score: 4, Interesting

      In what way do you have to fight WMP? You can set the default player by file type (and all video players give you the option to make their program the default). Plus you can go into "Turn Windows features on or off" and remove Windows Media Player completely in standard Windows 7.

      Well, I'm not the person you are replying to, but I installed the N version of Windows 7, and everything was cool and froody. I installed my favourite mp3 player, foobar2000, and all was well. Then I needed to get a Windows Performance Index for my PC, and for that I needed to install WMP. And, crazily, I lost the context menus in Explorer for "Play in foobar2000" and "Enqueue in foobar2000." After trying many registry tweaks I researched, I uninstalled WMP and got my menus back. I suspect that's the kind of fighting that the person you are replying to experienced.

      I think I only got the full Aero UI experience once I'd installed WMP and calculated my WPI, but I might be wrong on that front.

      --
      Note to ACs: I won't mod you up, even if you are being funny or insightful. So take a chance! It's not real life!
    22. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "The episode was cited as a reason for giving Steve Ballmer, chief executive, only half his potential bonus last year."

      Cry me a river.

      Slashdot needs a +1 LOL moderation option.

    23. Re:Obvious troll by Impy+the+Impiuos+Imp · · Score: 2

      Neither company should be using government to hamper its competitors, and government shouldn't have the power to be the servant of interests trying to hurt others to give themselves economic advantage.

      --
      (-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
    24. Re:Obvious troll by capedgirardeau · · Score: 1

      What the government entity is doing here is making sure that one company cannot leverage its monopoly position in one area (operating systems) to prevent competition in another area (web browsers), otherwise known as "leveling the playing field."

      No one is be disadvantaged, one company is prevented from being abusive of its market position in an unrelated area to web browsers.

      That is exactly what a regulator should do, ensure a competitive market to increase consumer choice which will then determine who succeeds in that particular market.

      --
      Wax on, wax off baby!
    25. Re:Obvious troll by BasilBrush · · Score: 1

      Who's using unencrypted WiFi?

    26. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      One thing I've been unable to do in Win 7 is get the default 'play' context menu item to accept my preferred player.

      I can 'Play in VLC' from the context menu, but the bold, top of the menu 'play' refuses to be anything other than WMP. I might be able to fix it by enabling autorun and setting the autoplay to VLC, but I don't want autorun enabled on my system.

    27. Re:Obvious troll by RaceProUK · · Score: 1

      One thing I've been unable to do in Win 7 is get the default 'play' context menu item to accept my preferred player.

      I can 'Play in VLC' from the context menu, but the bold, top of the menu 'play' refuses to be anything other than WMP. I might be able to fix it by enabling autorun and setting the autoplay to VLC, but I don't want autorun enabled on my system.

      I've always been able to get it to work fine - you must have missed an option or something.

      --
      No colour or religion ever stopped the bullet from a gun
    28. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It doesn't work that way. Competing companies will use anything to get an advantage. If your competitor is engaged in illegal activity, you report them as a matter of course. A dent in their reputation and their profits too - an advantage for your company.

      A goverment hopefully serves the purposes of the country's population. (In a democracy). That does NOT rule out interfering with business. Or doing business, for that matter. We don't all subscribe to the idea of 'minimalist government'. The U.S. may want that style of government - fine. Europeans go for bigger government - live with it!

    29. Re:Obvious troll by mabhatter654 · · Score: 1

      It takes somebody (who has their own share of EU investigations going on) that know how to say the RIGHT WORDS to get the courts action.

      Of course Microsoft is happily making up FUD and telling the people regulating Microsoft to go big Google and Apple.

      The moral of the story is that the tech companies have grown up and learned to use regulators as their personal toys. Of course if the companies all "did the right thing" there would be fewer things to snitch on.

    30. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I couldn't care less who tip them off, but in the same line, I need Adobe to stop forcing me to install Chrome on my pc with every flash update!

    31. Re:Obvious troll by FatLittleMonkey · · Score: 1

      This story is an obvious troll. There was no need to "tip off" the EU,

      Even if Google complained to the EU that Microsoft wasn't complying with the browser ballot agreement, how is that a "tip off", let alone "snitching"?

      Furthermore when did â500m before "nearly a billion dollars"?

      Try "€".

      --
      Science is all about firing a drunk pig out of a cannon just to see what happens.
    32. Re:Obvious troll by dririan · · Score: 1

      Is that anything like +1 Funny?

    33. Re:Obvious troll by sa1lnr · · Score: 1

      Just FYI Windows 7 N comes without media centre/player. It can be installed as a separate download.

    34. Re:Obvious troll by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      yes, and .50000000000 also rounds up to one. "Not quite 3/4 billion" is how I would have phrased it.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    35. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      Yeah, justify your fascism however you want man.

    36. Re:Obvious troll by RMingin · · Score: 1

      Lucky you. I at least use Chrome. Since I have Chrome, it asks me if I want the Ask Toolbar and homepage.

      --
      The preceding comment is my own, and in no way construes an opinon of the Emperor of Mankind.
    37. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The people whose private data Google captured with their street view cars.

    38. Re:Obvious troll by dietdew7 · · Score: 1

      I agree with you. I was trying to point out that previous poster was incorrect. 1 dollar would not round up to 1 billion it would round to 0 billion.

    39. Re:Obvious troll by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      This is very informative. It tells us that the only source for the 'snitch' allegation is a quote from another Murdoch publication.

      Once again the Murdoch empire shows its true colours. Given their behaviour, and Rupert's insatiable hunger for media monopoly, I will assume until I have seen proof otherwise that this is an orchestrated hit piece to slander the legislative process in the EU, in order to deflect attention away from the rapaciousness of News Corp and its subsidiaries.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    40. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      We are looking forward to a day when this unneccessary search engine is no longer in business and it is forboden to mention its name.

    41. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Under the original agreement, MS was supposed to "police itself". That is, the final word on compliance was up to MS. If that sounds a bit ridiculous, then you're not crazy. It was then a question of embarrassment to the EU regulators that many months later, MS had not mentioned that SP 1 borked the ballot to regulators, so they started an "investigation", which lasted another 18 monts. And now the fine comes down. If Google had any part in this, it was only to prod both parties into action.

    42. Re:Obvious troll by David+Gerard · · Score: 1

      Financial Times != Times. FT is owned by Pearson, who publish The Economist.

      --
      http://rocknerd.co.uk
    43. Re:Obvious troll by terjeber · · Score: 1

      Wow. You're a moron. Everyone very clearly didn't notice since it didn't disappear for "nearly everyone". In fact it disappeared for almost nobody. Your ignorance is even worse than your ability to convert EUR to USD.

    44. Re:Obvious troll by mvdwege · · Score: 1

      Phew. Never so happy to be wrong, the world is not as bad as I thought it was.

      --
      "I know I will be modded down for this": where's the option '-1, Asking for it'?
    45. Re:Obvious troll by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I hope Google didn't tip them off, since it's far more enjoyable to watch Microsoft self-destruct on its own.

  2. Who cares? by sofar · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Microsoft were fined for a reason. Who cares that google complained? They make a browser... this is sooooo non-news.

    1. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And to answer my own question: All the Apple fanbois care, obviously.

      You seem to like straw men...

    2. Re:Who cares? by shellbeach · · Score: 5, Funny

      Microsoft were fined for a reason. Who cares that google complained?

      I don't think you quite understand how the tech world has changed. With the rise of Android, iOS and OSX, Microsoft has become the new underdog. It's only right and just to give minority OSes your support when big corporate bullies try to take them down.

      Remember the love, people. When new items of hardware are released, make sure the question is asked here on /., "Sure, but can it run Windows??"

    3. Re:Who cares? by rvw · · Score: 1

      I don't think you quite understand how the tech world has changed. With the rise of Android, iOS and OSX, Microsoft has become the new underdog.

      Microsoft the new underdog? With 90% userbase on desktops I can hardly believe that. They cannot keep up with online services like Bing and Hotmail loses ground, and even Windows is losing to OSX, Chrome and possibly Ubuntu, but that doesn't count until Windows dives below 50% on the desktop.

    4. Re:Who cares? by N!k0N · · Score: 1

      Remember the love, people. When new items of hardware are released, make sure the question is asked here on /., "Sure, but can it run Windows??"

      No, and nothing of value was (will be?) lost.

    5. Re:Who cares? by petermgreen · · Score: 1

      MS still has a near monopoly on the computers people use for office and engineering work. Yes a lot of people have andrios or iOS smartphones but they are in addition to a windows PC, not instead of a windows PC.

      --
      note: i'm known as plugwash most places but i screwd up registering that here somehow in the past and now can't register
    6. Re:Who cares? by nyctopterus · · Score: 3, Informative

      You obviously haven't heard - nobody uses desktops any more, we're all using our phones, tablets, smartwatches and cyborg glasses now. 90% of nothin' is nothin'.

    7. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      The apple fanboys should care, they may have to reward google with sauce. The fanboys don't relize how much they owe MS. Remember it was MS that kept apple afloat when their times were bad. The EU in previous decisions said in order to avoid monoply conditions, where a huge fine, listed as a percent, not a number, i believe it was aroound 30% fine on world operations, as a monoply, if apple died then. Now there is a thing called "chrome OS", and they could let the apple boys wither.

    8. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Yes, MS is now the lovable loser of the tech world. Their attempts to scroogle the competition with pathetic attack campaigns and stupid made up words are adorably cute!

    9. Re:Who cares? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      All hail JOBS!

    10. Re:Who cares? by fermion · · Score: 1

      It would be news if Google or some other competitor did not, because that would be collusion, or cartel behavior. In the free market we have competition, and part of competition is ratting out your competitors when they don't follow code. On problem we have is that so many firms just go along with illegal behavior, joining in because everyone else is doing it, and that means honest firms often get left behind, leading to the kind of dishonesty that harms people and forces the taxpayer to bail out industries.

      --
      "She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
    11. Re:Who cares? by Tough+Love · · Score: 1

      With the rise of Android, iOS and OSX, Microsoft has become the new underdog.

      The evil, destructive, rich underdog. Underdog isn't good enough, Microsoft needs to be completely exterminated for the good of humanity.

      --
      When all you have is a hammer, every problem starts to look like a thumb.
    12. Re:Who cares? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Remember the love?

      I'm trying really, really hard, but I can't remember any love from Microsoft toward it's customers. Ever. Back in the day, ***DOS was available from a variety of sources, free or dirt cheap. MSDOS cost over a hundred dollars. I picked up a package at my local computer store, inspected it, read the marketing hype on the label, and told the wife, "I think I'll get this MSDOS 5.0." I got to the counter, and when the sales clerk told me that it cost something like $125, I put it back on the shelf.

      Yeah, I remember the love. Microsoft has always loved our money!

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    13. Re:Who cares? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Good point. Collusion will get you in a lot of trouble in the US. I can't believe it's not a crime in the EU. Had Google NOT snitched, they'd likely be setting themselves up for charges against themselves.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    14. Re:Who cares? by fido_dogstoyevsky · · Score: 1

      Microsoft were fined for a reason. Who cares that google complained?

      I don't think you quite understand how the tech world has changed. With the rise of Android, iOS and OSX, Microsoft has become the new underdog. It's only right and just to give minority OSes your support when big corporate bullies try to take them down.

      ...

      Unless the minority OS is put out by Microsoft, in which case those other other big corporate bullies should be given all assistance possible to euthanise Microsoft. A rabid underdog is still rabid.

      Of course, when those same other bullies are down they should in their turn be euthanised to put them out of our misery.

      Did I just say that or was I only thinking it?

      --
      It's NOT a conspiracy... it's a plot.
    15. Re:Who cares? by IAmR007 · · Score: 1

      Judging by Windows 8's design, a 1920x1200,2560x1600,1920x1200 display configuration is just a really really big phone.

  3. Snitch? by nospam007 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    A competitor violates the rules to ruin a company and if you call the cops you are a snitch?

    Are you a gang member or just a moron?

    1. Re:Snitch? by MadKeithV · · Score: 5, Insightful

      It ruined no one by not having that list present

      It was illegal and a violation of the agreement that Microsoft themselves signed with the EU after Microsoft lost the browser bundling court case. That's all that matters. The EU said "you can't do that" to Microsoft, Microsoft fought it hard in court, Microsoft lost, Microsoft agreed to a specific remedy, Microsoft then violated that remedy, Microsoft gets fined to send a message to any company that might think it's not that big a deal to violate a legal agreement with the EU. Whether it was sensible or not doesn't matter - it is the Law, and as a company you cannot flip off the Law and expect to get away with it.

    2. Re:Snitch? by black3d · · Score: 1, Informative

      Because Google is in ruins? I don't disagree that them "snitch"ing is a non-issue under the circumstances, but they're not exactly falling apart here.

      Looking at it from another perspective, Google have a fairly strong grip on the search market (not monopoly-esque, per se, there are available alternatives but the fact that people don't tell you to "search for it" but "Google for it" demonstrates their entrenchment in the marketplace). They certainly don't *advertise* other browsers in their products, except for Chrome. Nobody decries this fact, but from personal experience I can tell you about plenty of non-'computer people' who've installed Chrome simply because of the advertisements from Google telling them it'll let them "browse faster". Fact or not, they're leveraging their position very nicely to increase their market share.

      Microsoft distribute an Operating System and bundle a browser with it - the same as virtually every other OS out there. The only difference here is Microsoft's incredible market-share in the desktop space. They're not exactly making money off the browser, so the real shame here is that the EU still considers Microsoft's position to be an unfair advantage over its competitors browsers. Actually - maybe they don't. After all, they're not going back to court and trying to prove the necessity, just jumping on the fact that MS failed to keep an agreement.

      Nobody's in ruins over it. The only fact here is that MS violated their agreement. That's it. Chrome's marketshare has increased year on year, even during the SP1 "outage". If you're trying to argue "maybe it would have increased more...", you're grasping at straws.

      --
      "The true measure of a person is how they act when they know they won't get caught." - DSRilk
    3. Re:Snitch? by theVarangian · · Score: 1

      It ruined no one by not having that list present

      Microsoft was forced to put that ballot list up after they deliberately used bundling and threats of OEMs having their Windows license revoked unless they shunned a Microsoft competitor. This tactic was successful in that it ruined Netscape. The list was put there to try and prevent MS from doing it again to another company and as a signal to other tech companies of what happens when you use tactics like that, i.e. very large fines. That bloody ballot list is as much a head on a spike as anything else.

    4. Re:Snitch? by Duncan+J+Murray · · Score: 1

      Yes - when did big business become the playground again?!

      What I want to know is when the EU will investigate other possible anticompetitive practices such as:

      Customers being unable to not purchase Microsoft Windows from many of the OEM PC manufacturers.

      Secureboot

      D

    5. Re:Snitch? by DKlineburg · · Score: 1

      I did a search in Google. When searching for "Web browsers" IE was an extra small link at the very bottom of the page. Top result was Wikipedia, which I'm sure lists them a.. (i didn't bother to check), but just food for thought.

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    6. Re:Snitch? by DKlineburg · · Score: 1

      Does apple ever get in trouble for bundling safari? Do they offer a choice? I don't apple so I don't know.

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    7. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

      A competitor violates the rules to ruin a company and if you call the cops you are a snitch?

      Are you a gang member or just a moron?

      This is slashdot. Most slashdotters would be beaten to death by any gang they tried to join. I vote moron.

    8. Re:Snitch? by ibwolf · · Score: 1

      I did a search in Google. When searching for "Web browsers" IE was an extra small link at the very bottom of the page. Top result was Wikipedia, which I'm sure lists them a.. (i didn't bother to check), but just food for thought.

      And if you search for "web browsers" on Bing IE doesn't show up at all except in a side bar under 'related searches'. Seems MS hasn't done any SEO for IE under the term 'web browser'.

    9. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If the law is stupid, change the legislation, or change the legislature.

      Flouting the law is anarchy. I think the rules against murder are stupid, so I think I'll just ignore 'em, in your case.

    10. Re:Snitch? by mrt_2394871 · · Score: 1

      And if you search for "web browsers" on Bing IE doesn't show up at all except in a side bar under 'related searches'. Seems MS hasn't done any SEO for IE under the term 'web browser'.

      But if you're using IE, you're using IE, and there's no need to search for it.

      And if you're not using IE, then you're either on a platform which IE doesn't run on, or you (or your friendly BofH) have already taken steps to not be running IE. For either of those cases, you wouldn't be helped by searches for "web browser" listing IE highly.

      So any outlay of resource on SEO would be wasted.

    11. Re:Snitch? by MadKeithV · · Score: 1

      "Whether it was sensible or not doesn't matter - it is the Law"

      I think you show an obvious lack of critical thinking and so you should not have the right to vote.

      No, you are reading something into my post that isn't there. I am simply pointing out that there is a cause and effect relationship with breaking the law and/or a contract. The parameters of the effect in this particular case were clearly set out in the agreement between Microsoft and the EU, and Microsoft agreed to them before breaking the agreement.
      Finally, why does having the **right to vote** matter to you, if you don't actually accept the rule of law?

    12. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      A snitch is someone who reports activity without being affected himself. Google, however, delivers the Chrome browser. They are a party damaged by Microsoft's breach of their agreements to refrain from anti-competitive measures exploiting their operating system monopoly.

      So the EU does not monitor Microsoft's compliance, and when the damaged party does, it is a snitch?

      Horseradish.

    13. Re:Snitch? by Xest · · Score: 1

      "Finally, why does having the **right to vote** matter to you, if you don't actually accept the rule of law?"

      This isn't inconsistent with what he's saying. What he's saying is that he feels only he should decide when breaking the law does and doesn't matter, and that only he should decide who does and does not deserve to vote.

      In other words, he's a fond supporter of dictatorship propped up by fake democracy, such as in Iran, Russia and so forth.

      I wouldn't worry too much about him.

    14. Re:Snitch? by hawkinspeter · · Score: 2

      Nope. Apple don't have a monopoly and certainly aren't abusing a monopoly in one market to get ahead in a different market (which is what Microsoft where found guilty of).

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    15. Re:Snitch? by tehcyder · · Score: 2

      Does apple ever get in trouble for bundling safari?

      Altogether now: Apple is not a convicted monopolist so they can do what they like.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    16. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      "as a company you cannot flip off the Law and expect to get away with it."

      Unless you're in America.

    17. Re: Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If IE will run on your computer then it was pre-installed on your computer. IE doesn't run on non-Windows computers and is the very first browser installed on every Windows computer.

      No one who can run it needs to search for it.

    18. Re:Snitch? by Kwyj1b0 · · Score: 1

      Microsoft was forced to put that ballot list up after they deliberately used bundling and threats of OEMs having their Windows license revoked unless they shunned a Microsoft competitor. This tactic was successful in that it ruined Netscape.

      I'm sorry, but Netscape ruined Netscape. It wasn't mainly what Microsoft did (though that must have helped, and it was definitely illegal), but rather what Netscape did. I know lots and lots of people who liked Netscape Navigator (including me), but dropped it after it became Communicator (especially after version 4). Their browser was not as good as IE at that point.

      Now I use Mozilla Firefox, and have doing so for a long time (though their poor design choices might have me switching to SRWare Iron or Opera).

    19. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Another quick one, just out of the box, you install apple os. It asks you which browser you want too use? Before it gets to the internet?

    20. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ... as a company you can't flip off the law and expect to get away with it? On what planet? The only news in this story is that they actually fined Microsoft. If, in fact, the fine is ever paid.

    21. Re:Snitch? by Lanterns · · Score: 2

      So, can we conclude that Microsoft scroogled itself?

    22. Re:Snitch? by nukenerd · · Score: 1
      At least part of the reason IE became "better" than Netscape was that MS changed Internet standards in incompatible ways. Read this :-

      www.justice.gov/atr/cases/f2600/v-a.pdf

    23. Re:Snitch? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Because Google is in ruins? Nobody's in ruins over it.

      Nospam007 said "A competitor violates the rules to ruin a company and if you call the cops you are a snitch?"

      I did not read that as Google being in ruins. I read it that MS were violating the rules with that aim. As in "I drank the snake oil to give myself eternal life".

    24. Re:Snitch? by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      if you search for "web browsers" on Bing[,] IE doesn't show up at all except in a side bar

      It's not a browser. It is part of the operating system.

    25. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They really got binged on that one.

    26. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least part of the reason IE became "better" than Netscape was that MS changed Internet standards in

      You mean like how mozilla and webkit do the same thing--advance faster than the slow moving W3C.

    27. Re:Snitch? by Hatta · · Score: 1

      it is the Law, and as a company you cannot flip off the Law and expect to get away with it.

      Unless you're a bank.

      --
      Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
    28. Re:Snitch? by rocket+rancher · · Score: 1

      Does apple ever get in trouble for bundling safari?

      Altogether now: Apple is not *yet* a convicted monopolist so they can do what they like.

      FTFY

    29. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      At least part of the reason IE became "better" than Netscape was that MS changed Internet standards in

      You mean like how mozilla and webkit do the same thing--advance faster than the slow moving W3C.

      Maybe so, but they're not leveraging a 90+% position to use the changes to clobber competition...

    30. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I agree that Netscape was mostly to blame for ruining Netscape. Even as Mozilla it took such a long time for them to get the crappy code base to something vaguely useful and stable.

      However Microsoft lost the case, and so they screwed up by not complying and whether Google tipped the EU off is irrelevant. Microsoft is dropping the ball too much nowadays. They really should get their act together.

    31. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      but chrome isn't automatically installed when you do a google search, and it's not unremovable.

    32. Re:Snitch? by Runaway1956 · · Score: 1

      Yes, it ruined my whole fucking DAY! My whole DAY, dammit! I inserted the installation media, expecting to see a place to vote. It wasn't there. THOSE DOUCHES!!

      And, you're missing the point. MS had already been convicted of ruining people's businesses with unfair competition practices.

      How much do they pay you to be a shill?

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    33. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You don't have to be a *convicted* monopolist to be guilty of abusing a monopoly position, so whether they have been convicted yet is beside the point. But I don't think they have enough of the smartphone market to be considered to have a monopoly position, and they certainly don't have enough of the desktop market to have a monopoly position.

    34. Re:Snitch? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      nospam007 didn't specify which company MS were ruining with their actions, and they certainly would have had an effect on Opera and Mozilla.

    35. Re:Snitch? by farble1670 · · Score: 1

      like say, requiring iTunes to load content onto your iDevice, or requiring an iDevice to sync data from iTunes?

    36. Re:Snitch? by hawkinspeter · · Score: 1

      If they had a monopoly in a market, then your comment would have some merit.

      --
      You're a temporary arrangement of matter sliding towards oblivion in a cold, uncaring universe
    37. Re:Snitch? by DKlineburg · · Score: 1

      I hear your point, but I'm curious. How does being a monopolist make a difference? If they bundle safari (which it sounds like they do) than how is that different than MS bundling IE? It is an OS forcing a browser on you. Can I get mad at blackberry for forcing me to use their browser on there phone? How about the iPhone using safari? Can I change that?

      All I hear is because MS is bad. And they lost. I guess I look at it this way. Torts are utilized to leverage other cases. MS case is now a tort (I'm not lawyer, so lawyer can correct if I use wrong terms.). So utilizing this Tort, i can now extrapolate that all OS's should allow all options. But this isn't true. Only MS is picked on.

      So please explain how being a monopoly lets you get picked on? To me that sounds like, well rich people can't steel. But I'm not rich, so it is ok for me to steal. ???

      --
      Memory is deceptive because it is colored by today's events. - Albert Einstein
    38. Re:Snitch? by Emb3rz · · Score: 1

      A part of the operating system with which you browse. How is it not a browser?

  4. Thank you google for standing up for our rights by detain · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Its too bad slashdot has been reduced to articles like. I applaud google for helping out the individuals rights to choose what software they run on the computer, and find it shocking that the new slashdot owners are posting an article trying to shun google for helping in an anti-trust case. Aren't we supposed to be on the side of those people fighting for things like this? Next up our new slashdot overlords will be poking fun at the EFF.

    --
    http://interserver.net/
    1. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

      You always had a right to download another browser. People didn't even notice that the list of competing browsers was even missing for f*cks sake. Are you saying it's a user right to be spoon fed a list of competing products everywhere or was someone targeted because they have a deep bank account.

      Why the hell isn't my shampoo bottle giving me the list of all other shampoo's I can use!11

    2. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by meerling · · Score: 0

      I've rather been of the opinion that if someone was too stupid to use IE to download a better browser, they didn't have enough computer literacy to use the other browser anyway.

      I say using IE to get the other browser because I really don't expect a non-techie to know how to use terminal (or another non-browser method) to obtain one.

    3. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by cyber-vandal · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Are you serious? What extra computer literacy do you need to use Firefox or Chrome?

    4. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Are you saying it's a user right to be spoon fed a list of competing products everywhere

      We are talking about Google users here... so yes.

    5. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by blackest_k · · Score: 1

      The Internet is not a Microsoft product.

      It may come as a surprise that many people pretty much believed that it was that or AOL.
      Microsoft tried hard to make it one, what with active X and its other propitiatory technology it pushed hard to try to get entrenched.

      Now we have choice, very rarely do we need a particular browser to be able to access a site and that was quite common at one time.

      The computer literacy needed to use chrome or firefox? Simply to know that they exist and are as capable if not marginally more so than Microsofts offerings. That was a big change and one part of that change was the browser ballot page that Microsoft agreed to.

           

    6. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by erroneus · · Score: 1

      You've got that wrong.

      Google is a service which gets its audience by doing nice things for people. (read: providing value) For all the things you might fear Google, they keep people coming back with pretty neat and entertaining stuff. They are capitalizing on good will and will defend that whenevery and whereever possible. It is their business model. (Exceptions exist... China)

      In my mind, this is more "Tom and Jerry." Tom has spent billions on lawyers, lobbying, bribes/donations/contributions, pulling dirty tricks and stunts and more recently, Scroogled campaigns. Lots of Tom's efforts are comical failures but still caused Jerry a bit of trouble... there are more Jerrys than Google because I'm talking about lots of comical things like the SCO case, OOXML and all that sort of stuff you might read on Groklaw.

      As the article is essentially baseless accusaiton, I'm not going to say "oh they snitched alright." And I'm not going to say they are justified or that they should have. (After all, anyone who hates Microsoft could have done it and there are a LOT of Microsoft haters out there... it could have been me!! Why does it have to be Google?) But I will say, that if it was one of Google's lawyers who did? Then this is Jerry escaping from a a Jerry-mouse sandwich, substituting himself for Tom's tail and then pulling the chair out from under Tom. As Tom sits down, he bites his tail off and flies around screaming which alerts the big bulldog in the yard to his presense and gets subsequently beaten.

      The comical part is Microsoft did all the things necessary to set up the gag and Jerry, whoever it was, made minimal effort to strike a blow against Tom while defending his life.

      The only unfortunate thing about this post is now I am hearing Tom and Jerry music in my head.... ... and SO ARE YOU!!!

    7. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      Are you serious? What extra computer literacy do you need to use Firefox or Chrome?

      You need to have an ideological or technological interest in taking the time to download and learn the quirks of a new browser that in practice will do exactly the same as Internet Explorer for the normal user.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    8. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      The computer literacy needed to use chrome or firefox? Simply to know that they exist and are as capable if not marginally more so than Microsofts offerings. That was a big change and one part of that change was the browser ballot page that Microsoft agreed to.

      Are there any figures for how many people actually downloaded an alternative browser due to the browser ballot page? Nobody I know who isn't interested in computers would even have bothered reading it.

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    9. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by nukenerd · · Score: 1

      Its too bad slashdot has been reduced to articles like. I ... find it shocking that the new slashdot owners are posting an article trying to shun google for helping in an anti-trust case.

      Eh? I had not realised TFA was meant to be anti-Google.

    10. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Aren't we supposed to be on the side of those people fighting for things like this?

      It depends, when it's about Google being anti-competitive, or anything and anyone involving Linux or FOSS doing something shitty, then no. If it's Apple, Microsoft or Oracle, then yes. In this case, yes, you're supposed to be fawning at Google. Good job, keep it up.

    11. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by terjeber · · Score: 1

      Google is a service which gets its audience by doing nice things for people

      You couldn't possibly be this dumb.

    12. Re:Thank you google for standing up for our rights by erroneus · · Score: 1

      Google most definitely does things which people like. I'm not saying it does ONLY stuff which people like. But what keeps the people coming back are useful services including, but not limited to, search, email, chat, forums, shopping... things people like with a quality they can appreciate.

  5. it was EU's responsibility by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It only makes a difference, because it was not EU who recognized EU's responsibility in making sure MS lives up to it's obligations. And I hoped that slow as they are they are at least learning something. In vain.

  6. So, doing the right thing is called "snitching"? by DNS-and-BIND · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Sad, sad, sad submitter. Reflects the intellectual poverty of one who has no other idea of this action than "snitching". The very word is negative and implies something is wrong with informing the authorities that Microsoft is breaking the law (again - what a surprise). Where did this even come from? Oh yeah, "snitches get stitches". Who created this meme? Oh yeah, drug dealers who wanted to intimidate the local population into silence. And now the media is going along with it without even thinking of the implications. Good job everyone.

    --
    Shutting down free speech with violence isn't fighting fascism. It IS fascism!
  7. Who is Adam Clark Estes? by Psychotria · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Who is Adam Clark Estes? I'd really like to know, because his "article" reads like it was written like a 5-year-old. "Ooooh, you can't snitch on people; the honour code is not to snitch! They are is not are playing fair! They is are doing what they're s'posed to do! They stoled my donut and lunch money but I didn't snitch! Snitches is are naughty!" Is he still in kindergarten?

    His closing words in his "article": "Well, who looks triumphant now?"

    Not you, Adam. But you do look like a moron.

    1. Re:Who is Adam Clark Estes? by Lorens · · Score: 1

      Who is Adam Clark Estes? I'd really like to know, because his "article" reads like it was written like a 5-year-old.

      At five, it is true that children usually do not know the difference between "its" and "it's". I tried to parse "down" as "party-time" before my eyes went back and decided there shouldn't be a verb before "competitor". I thought it was the submitter, but it's from the TFA.

    2. Re:Who is Adam Clark Estes? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's one of the new breed of blogger. He's one of the many, many people who are turning Adderall and desperation into four or five cut-n-paste blog posts a day, every day, in his mad race to afford a tiny studio in Manhattan.

      If he's really lucky, someday he might be sponsored by a large PR firm. Then he'll be able to trade his credibility for money, and maybe even move into a bigger apartment without roommates. But until then, he'll just keep scrambling to post 100 random crap articles a month about Google, William Shatner, Megan Fox, and snow.

  8. If they did by Chrisq · · Score: 0

    They should apply for a crimestoppers (snitch) reward

  9. Honestly: WHO CARES? by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 1

    So somebody allegedly told the EU something that the EU would have found out if they did a minimum effort to monitor the agreement.

    Big deal.

    Next on Slahshdot: Where is my ass?

  10. 17+ months and the world didn't notice but Google? by edelbrp · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't get it (I'm not in the EU), but you might have thought more people would have noticed besides Google that the Browser Ballot was missing for 17-18 months? Seems odd.

  11. News by morons for morons by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    ...about morons. The new Slashdot. Remember to visit idle!

  12. "Bullying Consumers" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Including a web browser with an operating system is "bullying consumers"? Be serious.

  13. Re:17+ months and the world didn't notice but Goog by FaxeTheCat · · Score: 3, Informative

    It is odd, and most likely not true.

    It was Opera software who originally complained, an one would assume they have taken five minutes occasionally to check.

  14. Re:17+ months and the world didn't notice but Goog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

    I know for a fact it wasn't only, if at all, Google complaining about the missing ballot screen. I filed a complaint myself. I'd also be surprised if of all competitors Opera didn't file a complaint. The only thing I wonder is, whether my email with the complaint went directly to /dev/null. I've never received a reply.

  15. Means nothing to MS by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    A few hundred million fine every few years means nothing to MS. Its basically ordinary operating expenses, and even then, not that big of one.

  16. Its. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Jesus.

  17. The ballot was down for 14 months. by Faluzeer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    According to reports, the ballot was out of action for 14 months before the EU noticed. So if Google really did snitch, they most certainly did not do so in a timely manner.

    This just seems to be pure speculation, given the length of time the ballot was down, it could be anyone or no one...

    1. Re:The ballot was down for 14 months. by IICV · · Score: 1

      I imagine whoever "snitched" only did so after they realized that the EU was being completely idiotic and not checking up on their own.

  18. Redwood? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    Where is Redwood Washington? Is it anywhere near Redmond?

    1. Re:Redwood? by ls671 · · Score: 3, Funny

      But with a recent headline-stealing dispute between the Redwood, Washington company and Google,
      it's competitor down in Mountain Diew, California...

      --
      Everything I write is lies, read between the lines.
  19. redwood by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    >redwood

  20. But...... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I am confused with 2 things....

    First of all..... nobody likes a snitch, right? I mean.... right?

    Second...... isn't it the case that google is doing the same with their android and chrome OS system?
    I mean in the end it is about and OS and it's browser (user should have browser choice in OS).... so that would mean that Android, IOS, Chrome OS and Max OS are also in violation.... no?

    I think humans are stupid...

  21. The shame here... by tuppe666 · · Score: 1

    the real shame here is that the EU still considers Microsoft's position to be an unfair advantage over its competitors browsers

    It was and still is monopoly abuse. The fact that browsers exist on mobile devices where Microsoft is a laughing stock because its not an entrenched monopoly is just an aside. The reality is perhaps the EU should take a closer look at iOS and Android, to ensure that users are given a choice there, as we have seen the damage that Microsoft did [does] to the internet should not be allowed to move to other devices.

    The shame here is it took browsers generation ahead....and a complete paradigm shift in computing habits over a decade to get 50% of the market, and still people defend Microsoft.

    1. Re:The shame here... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      They are given a choice, lots of them. Where pray tell is IE for android? iOS?

  22. Abuse by Wowsers · · Score: 2

    If Google told on Microsoft, I have no problem with that. Now, Google should inform on Microsoft on trying to control the entire PC market and squash Operating System competition with "their" hated "Trusted computing" platform http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Trusted_Computing ..

    Based on Microsoft's track record, how can you a) Trust Microsoft b) Trust ANY company .c) Leave control of your hardware to a corporation that does bidding of governments / media cartel - especially if they are foreign governments.

    --
    Take Nobody's Word For It.
    1. Re:Abuse by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Newsflash, ALL governments are foreign, including "your own".

      People are afraid of "their" government, if it really was "their" government, why would they be afraid?

  23. I don't think you quite understand. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1

    I don't think you quite understand.

    This was about complying with a past ruling on previous monopoly behaviour, (they are a convicted monopolist after all)

    Irrespective of whether other platforms exist using broadly the same technology, NONE of them are convicted monopolists.

    Windows still holds a significant proportion of the desktop world to ransom (perhaps > 95%) specifically because they still maintain their monopoly.

    Why should the EU let them slide on the consequences of their conviction and punishment.

    To my mind that just shows utter contempt for the rule of law in the EU which show Microsoft has not changed its spots.

    1. Re:I don't think you quite understand. by ThePhilips · · Score: 1

      Replying to cancel wrong moderation

      --
      All hope abandon ye who enter here.
    2. Re:I don't think you quite understand. by Plunky · · Score: 1

      (they are a convicted monopolist after all)

      I'm not sure that being a monopolist is any kind of crime, so being convicted of such a thing does not seem possible? However, I have seen such language here before and I would like to emphasize that they were convicted of being monopoly abusers, as in.. they abused their fully legal monopoly position. I feel that there are different possible PR angles around these terms, and it is important that we do not encourage that.

      convicted monopolist: the implication can be promoted that its not really their fault that they are so popular that everybody uses their products and the EU really is unfair to penalize them because of that.

      convicted monopoly abuser: this is much more difficult to weasel out of, as it has the negative word abuser in the phrase.

      Personally, I prefer the latter phrase as it is more descriptive and correct, and I feel it is important to label such a company as this correctly, so that other people who would otherwise not know the details, are not as able to be misled..

  24. "tipped off European authorities TO..." by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It's "tipped off European authorities ABOUT antitrust concerns", not "to".

    You Americans...

  25. Re:17+ months and the world didn't notice but Goog by dintech · · Score: 1

    17-18 months is about the time it takes before you absolutely have to reinstall windows again. :)

  26. A long and noble tradition by Turminder+Xuss · · Score: 1

    Competitors dobbing on each other to regulators. Shock horror.

    --
    You seem to regard science as some kind of dodge... or hustle.
  27. Yes there was. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "Almost a billion dollars" is more wrong than "Almost half a billlion".

    If they'd said "Almost a trillion", and someone pointed out that a billion was closer, would you say "it doesn't need to be, there was no comparison between those"?

    1. Re:Yes there was. by tehcyder · · Score: 1

      You would never say that $734m was "almost half a billion" in English. You might say "over half a billion" but it would be more accurate to say "almost three quarters of a billion" rather than "almost a billion".

      --
      To have a right to do a thing is not at all the same as to be right in doing it
    2. Re:Yes there was. by symbolset · · Score: 1

      If I was looking for nits to pick, I could greater nit than this.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    3. Re:Yes there was. by Tumbarumba · · Score: 4, Funny

      If I was looking for nits to pick, I could greater nit than this.

      How many nits could a nit picker pick, if a nit picker could pick nits?

      --
      My business: Farstrider Studios.
    4. Re:Yes there was. by symbolset · · Score: 1

      If a nit picker would pick nits, this was a spot with no nits to pick.

      --
      Help stamp out iliturcy.
    5. Re:Yes there was. by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2

      Sorry, but I got hung up on the numbers as well. "not quite 3/4 billion dollars" does not equal "almost a billion dollars". When someone says "almost a billion", I most definitely expect something more than .8 billion. Less than .75 is simply not "almost".

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    6. Re:Yes there was. by 140Mandak262Jamuna · · Score: 1

      How many nits could a nit picker pick, if a nit picker could pick nits?

      This does not take advantage of the homonyms wood and would. You could have used knit, as in How many nits could a nit-knitter nit if a nit knitter could knit nits?

      --
      sed -e 's/Chuck Norris/Rajnikant/g' joke > fact
  28. Not going to cost MS anything by EmagGeek · · Score: 1

    It's going to cost Microsoft's users something, though, since that fine, if it is even upheld on appeal, will be integrated into the cost of Microsoft products.

    1. Re:Not going to cost MS anything by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Microsoft prices prodcuts for maximum profit. This price does not depend of any fine they may have gotten.

      The shareholders will pay however as it reduces profits.

  29. No evidence Google was involved .. by dgharmon · · Score: 4, Informative

    "Brussels punished Microsoft for failing to give at least 15m consumers a choice of web browser - a violation of a voluntary antitrust pact that was spotted and raised by Google and Opera, according to several people familiar with the case."

    "Opera said it was "happy to see that the Commission is enforcing compliance with the commitment, which is critical to ensuring a genuine choice among web browsers for consumers". Google declined to comment."

    Google tip-off leads to Microsoft EU penalty

    --
    AccountKiller
  30. Since Microsoft suggested that they do that by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since Microsoft suggested that they do that, then you're asserting you know better than Microsoft what should be done to their OS...

  31. Where is Redwood, WA?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I can haz engrish speaking?

  32. Re:So, doing the right thing is called "snitching" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Omerta, the code of not snitching, is an ancient part of Sicilian culture. Why are you so racist against Italians and Sicilians?

  33. Re:17+ months and the world didn't notice but Goog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Probably lots of people noticed, but you can't imagine the amount of time needed for Brussel's bureaucrats to do something about it.

  34. Who doesn't? by raymorris · · Score: 1, Interesting

    n you're asserting you know better than Microsoft what should be done to their OS

    Who doesn't know better than Microlost? For example, does anyone think Metro was a good idea? Hot corners? Burying "turn off" in Control Pnael, several clicks away from the desktop? One might say that any argument predicated on Microsoft having a clue is suspect.

  35. More importantly by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Since this is such a non-newsworthy troll, let's talk about something important. The Debian Wheezy release has just been set back by a newly discovered "grave functionality bug". When extremetuxracer starts, tux turns left.

  36. reminder by micahraleigh · · Score: 0

    The story is that Microsoft broke the law, NOT that the EU has bad laws or that its economy is entirely based on mooching off the US.

    Try to stay focused here, people.

  37. There is something better than a fine ... by GNUALMAFUERTE · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Copyright and Patents are not a human right, or an undeniable/natural right. They are a made up concept, a contract between society and the copyright/patent holder. "We will allow you to restrict usage of this particular work if you continue to make other works like this for the benefit of society". Sure, it doesn't work that way, but that's what's supposed to be anyway. So, since we are giving someone a privilege, society should be able to set the rules, and take back the privilege if the rules are broken. So the contract should be more like "We will allow you to restrict usage of this particular work for a limited period of time, but you must offer this work under reasonable prices and policies, you must respect your users, and you must play nicely with the rest of the market. Also, you have to deposit all of your source code and any other information you used to create your work, and after that period expires, or if you break the contract, they'll be released to the public domain.". That sounds like a much more rational contract. You want the privilege of copyright or patents? Great, we'll give it to you. We'll give you anywhere between 5 and 15 years of copyright or patent protection, how much will depend on the kind of work you are releasing. In exchange, you have to deposit with us all relevant information regarding your work, for example, source code in the case of software, manufacturing procedures and blueprints in the case of hardware, etc. If you breach this contract, you'll lose all protection, and after the the original protection is over, we'll still release all that information. If your breach of contract is bad enough, we'll also release all those secrets early.

    This fine is like making the penalty for bank robbery 25% of the money stolen. Everyone will be robbing banks ... it's not a penalty, or a fine, it's a tax. Well, microsoft's benefit from locking down the market far exceeds 731 million dollars, so it's not a fine, it's just tax.

    Threaten companies with losing copyright and patent protection, and see how quickly they start to behave.

    --
    WTF am I doing replying to an AC at 5 A.M on a Friday night?
  38. Re:So, doing the right thing is called "snitching" by aaaaaaargh! · · Score: 1

    And now the media is going along with it without even thinking of the implications.

    Anyone who writes a blog for The Wall Street Journal ought to know about the power of words, so perhaps the author just wanted to appeal to the criminal nature of his typical readership.

  39. Almost half a billion is less wrong, though. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Almost half a billion is less wrong than almost a billion.

  40. I think you'll find it was Apple that snitched. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I have no evidence to back this claim up, but seemingly that is unimportant.

  41. Re:So, doing the right thing is called "snitching" by Hatta · · Score: 1

    drug dealers who wanted to intimidate the local population into silence

    Drug dealers are on the side of freedom in the war on drugs. If it weren't for drug dealers putting their freedom and lives on the line, we wouldn't be seeing the tide turning away from prohibition.

    If someone lives in a neighborhood terrorized by drug dealers, the right thing to do isn't snitch. It's to lobby to end the war on drugs. Change drug dealers from outlaws to businessmen. After all, when was the last time someone died in a turf war between Anheuser Busch and Coors? Philip Morris and PJ Reynolds? Doesn't happen. Make drugs legal and the only person hurt is the user.

    Even though some drug dealers do terrible things, they are still better than the tyrants who demand prohibition. They hold the most responsibility for all the deaths in the war on drugs.

    --
    Give me Classic Slashdot or give me death!
  42. Re:So, doing the right thing is called "snitching" by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Y'know the world might be a far far better place if there were a LOT more snitches.

    All this antisnitching BS just seems to be popular amongst groups that do bad or even evil stuff.

    And to go even further, if the leader of my country ever declared war with another country without good reason, I believe the really patriotic thing to do is to shoot him till he dies. Not fight the frigging war and die for him

    But I'm not a patriot myself ;).

  43. And the USA are mooching off HSBC by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    And the USA are mooching off HSBC, with an even huger fine because the USA are even bigger crooks, right?

    1. Re:And the USA are mooching off HSBC by PPH · · Score: 1

      HSBC was collateral damage. The USA was after some of its slaves (citizens) that dared to venture off the plantation. They refused to participate in the USA's global posse comitatus and paid the price.

      --
      Have gnu, will travel.
  44. He said, She said by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    more of the same, insanity

  45. Why Not by TheSkepticalOptimist · · Score: 1

    Microsoft's been posing shit about Scroogled so its just fair play that Google should tip off the EU that Microsoft isn't respecting their legal responsibilities

    Don't you love it when billion dollar corporations act like children?

    --
    I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
  46. what's the big deal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    So why did Google HAVE to tell them that Microsoft wasn't following their plan in the first place? Who cares if it was Google and what they should be concerned about that had they not pointed it out, Microsoft would have possibly continued without anyone but the customers noticing.

    Shooting the messenger are we?

  47. Re:17+ months and the world didn't notice but Goog by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Let's assume you're one of the few people who are savvy enough to know there should be a ballot and that you actually care about it not being there, would you know where to actually complain to without getting ignored. Google and Opera know how to make a formal complaint about this, and they probably have contacts to make sure the complaint doesn't get ignored.

  48. Re:17+ months and the world didn't notice but Goog by gatfirls · · Score: 1

    If the story is true then the real story is that google had a voice when the people didn't.

  49. Common pattern by dumky2 · · Score: 1

    From my understanding, this is often the case in antitrust cases.
    Although antitrust is supposed to protect consumers, it is rarely because of user complaints that this power is wielded.

    It should not be surprising, if such legal weapons are made available, the companies will seek to leverage them to club competitors. They just have to find a plausible rationale to give the case a veneer of civility.

    --
    These comments are mine; I do not speak for my employer.
  50. A happy comment by eminencja · · Score: 1

    Why nobody is demanding a browser ballot for Android? Monopollies are broken not by bueaucrats but by technology advance. Same thing happened to the railway monopolly (Technology brought lorries) But now the EU beaucrats have another billion to waste. If you're happy I am!

  51. Re:17+ months and the world didn't notice but Goog by RivenAleem · · Score: 1

    It was quite obvious when "Where's the browser ballot in Windows gone?" became a common search on Google.