MS: Noncompliance Only Costs $2.5 Million Per Day in the EU

[Citizen Philip]

I've been following this story off and on for awhile, but hadn't seen anything new until I dropped by Slashdot today. In essence: The European Union has decided that the software bundling with Windows violates monopoly laws in Europe: As Microsoft has failed to demonstrate their innocence or compliance with these policies, they are getting fined. Daily.

Here is the link (http://politics.slashdot.org/politics/06/06/27/1459246.shtml) from Slashdot.

Quote from Slashdot Article: The European Union is unsatisfied with Microsoft's compliance with their anti-trust compliance from 2004, and is preparing to fine them 2 million Euros ($2.5m US) per day until they comply. Under that ruling, Microsoft must open up parts of their operating system to competitors, and change how they bundle Media Player.
The original (?) BBC article (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/5120536.stm).
Quote from BBC article: Under the landmark 2004 decision, Brussels found Microsoft was abusing its market leading position in the desktop software market to stifle competition.
That is quite an expensive price tag.

[GrinR]

Simple solution: Pull out of Europe.

I'm sure they'll do fine with Linux.

[Roc Ingersol]

They ruled on the daily fines almost 2 years ago.

It's still pretty iffy whether the EU will ever bother to actually levy those fines.

[bapenguin]

Simple solution: Pull out of Europe.

I'm sure they'll do fine with Linux.

Actually this would be a case where I think MS could say, "oh yeah...fuck you we aren't selling here."

This would put some serious pressure on the EU and probably cause them to rethink it.

[ElPresidente]

Would certainly be a coup - a company effectively blackmailing a political/economic organisation as big as the EU.

[Stryfe01]

The EU is shit...They take forever to enact laws and this whole Euro crap just made everything more expensive than it needs to be.

[StGeorge]

Money is the only thing that Microsoft would understand, although given how they frequently and easily give up half-billion dollar settlements, their budget for this type of thing is around $3-5 billion per year. So they will be able to last about 2000 days or over 5 years (or about when the next Microsoft OS comes out) on this year's "compliace" budget alone. Microsoft will undoubtedly appeal, which will delay the first fine by a good 3 years alone. I would like to see the fine be somewhere on the order of $250 million per day. This would get MS to change their monopolist ways in a hurry.

[koorb]

I think the EU courts are being over zealous because what they are asking Microsoft to do has been fixed in Vista.

[SexualChoc]

Simple solution: Pull out of Europe.

I'm sure they'll do fine with Linux.

The hell I will. But seriously, the EU is like this with everything. They nitpick about every thing and find a way to squeeze money out of them. It sucks.

[NoName]

I would like to see the fine be somewhere on the order of $250 million per day. This would get MS to change their monopolist ways in a hurry.
Or... Microsoft would laugh and tell the EU to take a hike. They don't have to sell their software world wide...

[Darkstar]

Ah yes... the EU shows it's socialist side once again. Kinda tough to bludgeon a company into compliance when it's yearly revenue is greater than a lot of the EU's member's GDP.

edit: spellelleleleing

[01010]

Boohoo, a monopolistic corporation is actually receiving the slap on the wrist they deserve and the EU is in the wrong.

I'm sorry but this is one of the few times I agree with an EU ruling. It's about time someone started holding these corporations accountable for their actions, and if it's by means of a hefty fine then so be it.

[RMan]

I think the EU courts are being over zealous because what they are asking Microsoft to do has been fixed in Vista.
Hehe, I don't believe that for one second. Since the OS hasn't been released yet, it's pretty hard to make a statement like that, I think the best we can hope for it them exchanging one anti-competitive method for another. Without serious 3rd party intervention, monopolies don't give up their edge like that, and MS shows no evidence of being different than any other monopoly in that respect.

[Heretic Machine]

Boohoo, a monopolistic corporation is actually receiving the slap on the wrist they deserve and the EU is in the wrong.

Monopolistic? Excuse me, but I never had a hard time downloading and installing alternate media players, browsers, or anything else for that matter. Hell, if I choose to, I can even use a different shell for the desktop.

If you don't like the way Windows works, or the programs that are bundled with it, you can either modify your Windows installation or move to Linux. It's that simple.

[ElPresidente]

Agreed. Seriously how many people do you know who use Media Player for anything other than embedded video?

[RMan]

If you don't like the way Windows works, or the programs that are bundled with it, you can either modify your Windows installation or move to Linux. It's that simple.
Yea, and if I don't like the phone company, I can use a different communication system, so AT&T wasn’t a monopoly and didn't use anti-competitive practices before they were broken up, right? I've not seen the details of this ruling or what specifically their complaining about, but the bottom line is that if you want to stifle competition and you control the infrastructure upon which the competition must launch, there's MANY ways through software that you can kill them if unrestrained. They’re almost assuredly talking about methods by which MS can assure that media distribution methods or packages other than their own cannot get a foothold, since media distribution is the next frontier for them (MS and Sony trying to do the same thing here with different mediums).

[TrackZero]

Simple solution: Pull out of Europe.

I'm sure they'll do fine with Linux.

As in war, you don't want a power vaccum occuring. It can be dangerous and provide competition with a serious advantage. MS will never pull out of Europe, that's simply foolish.

[King Chaos]

The EU is shit...They take forever to enact laws and this whole Euro crap just made everything more expensive than it needs to be.

Hear! Hear! Let us disolve that bureaucratic pile of crap!

[Heretic Machine]

Yea, and if I don't like the phone company, I can use a different communication system, so AT&T wasn’t a monopoly and didn't use anti-competitive practices before they were broken up, right?

Is Microsoft the only company legally aloud to produce programs that work as a media player? No, they aren't. You can use any media player you want, even on their operating system. They include theirs because it is conveniant and makes the package more attractive to potential customers.

[Trickyicky]

On one hand we have to respect that what they are doing is technically illegal where the product is being sold, and they should have abided by that.

On the other hand, forcing them to give away their trade secrets and code so that competitors can more or less steal and copy them in order to make 'competition' is kind of stupid. They're the market leaders because of the quality of their product, and the competition isn't going to try and innovate as much with their products if they can just steal the 'money-making' ideas and sources from Microsoft.

[RMan]

Is Microsoft the only company legally aloud to produce programs that work as a media player? No, they aren't.
Nope, but technically any communications company could start a phone company, but in the real world they couldn’t because the company controlling the bulk of the infrastructure could shut them down. Again, without some more info on what anti-competitive practices were in play, just saying “competition is possible, therefore no anti-competitive practices are being used” is an illogical assessment.
On the other hand, forcing them to give away their trade secrets and code so that competitors can more or less steal and copy them in order to make 'competition' is kind of stupid.
That’s not the same thing as releasing information about your system. That’s kinda the point, if MS wanted to, they could make sure that no software product could ever compete with theirs simply by not exposing necessary elements of the OS to anyone but their developers (which seems to be the idea behind these charges), they aren't required to give away the source code to media player to competitors, only the necessary info so that making a program like media player would be possible. Heck, if they were given free reign over their software as some feel they should have, they could easily shut down Google by directly targeting them, or anyone else that poses a threat to them and relies in any way on their infrastructure. In short, the OS is infrastructure, and to allow them to do anything they want with that infrastructure would have been like the government not breaking up AT&T, and if that hadn’t happened I seriously doubt we’d be having this conversation because the internet would not have taken off like it has.
They're the market leaders because of the quality of their product, and the competition isn't going to try and innovate as much with their products if they can just steal the 'money-making' ideas and sources from Microsoft.
Look, I actually like many MS products, and I don’t think they do a bad job with software development, but to think they are the market leaders purely because of the quality of their product is just naïve. They mostly are where they are because they got their software integrated first. An operating system doesn’t lend itself to competition anymore than phone lines do, once people are even mildly dependant on a standard there has to be an extremely compelling reason to switch away (remember, there’s software and possibly hardware compatibility issues to deal with).

[Savok]

I believe the fines are a form of charity. Gates is helping prop up the EU, a truely generous man.

And sometimes I think we forget that with the monopoly comes some semblance of compatability. Just think if developers got even more of that shit dumped on them, we'd never see a working PC game again.

Not that MS aren't a pack of assholes that got to where they are through back stabbing and fucking people, but there are nice side effects. That said, I can't remember an instance of MS going out of their way to screw a competitor by turning the OS on them.

[f1sh3r]

yay! microsoft bashing!

[net7runner]

They're the market leaders because of the quality of their product, and the competition isn't going to try and innovate as much with their products if they can just steal the 'money-making' ideas and sources from Microsoft.

I'm sorry...uh...eh...BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA....

Heh, thanks man, I needed that. Hooeee that was funny....

By the way, does anyone else understand what Savok said?

[StGeorge]

Or... Microsoft would laugh and tell the EU to take a hike. They don't have to sell their software world wide...

It's one thing for Africa to move to Ubuntu... no one gives a crap. But if the EU, one of the three mega-economic centers (after US and before Asia), moves to Linux, that's going to make a dent in Microsoft's monopoly. A serious dent.

Once the monopoly is gone, then it's no longer "necessary" to go with Microsoft operating systems, is it? The only reason Microsoft enjoys the success it does today is due to two things: lock-in and piracy. Those are the only ways to achieve a 98% market penetration (force people to use your product or give it away for free).

Back in 1998 Bill Gates said "I don't mind if China pirates Windows, if they have to pirate, let it be Windows. But eventually we will collect." What makes you think the same plan wasn't put into effect in 1988 for the American market?