| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
EU ready to defend landmark anti-trust ruling against Microsoft in court | |
|
||
| Time: 10:49 EST/15:49 GMT | News Source: E-Mail | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
The European Commission is prepared to defend its decision to slap a record fine of half a billion euros on US software giant Microsoft in a landmark anti-trust ruling, an EU official said Thursday. Erkki Liikanen, the European Commissioner for Enterprise and Information Society who is visiting New Delhi, told reporters that the European Commission was ready to face any court action that Microsoft might initiate against it. | ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 324 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:26:40 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #1 By 2138 (80.98.192.116) at 3/25/2004 11:38:55 AM |
|
i agree with you HexJam, TOTALLY!
robert... |
| #2 By 1896 (68.153.171.248) at 3/25/2004 2:56:14 PM |
|
#1 Have fun with RealPlayer. a collection of garbage and spyware software.
|
| #3 By 3465 (65.222.179.211) at 3/25/2004 3:13:20 PM |
| Hello, we are the EU. We need money. Thank you.<the end> |
| #4 By 21912 (24.205.99.194) at 3/25/2004 3:17:56 PM |
|
Actually, the Media Player is just a part of Microsoft's overall strategy to establish revenue streams from delivery of media over the internet. But if Microsoft can guarantee that their media player has the same monopoly-level market share as the Windows OS itself, that gives them much greater control over critical media production standards, digital rights management, and streaming protocols/file formats. That's a lot of control to have over one of the potentially largest emerging markets that may ever exist, and it's an advantage that no other company can have. Can you say "Internet Toll Booth," boys and girls?
Nothing in the EU decision forbids Microsoft from creating and distributing an innovative media player, unless their sole innovation is to embed it within the Windows OS. I would argue that leveraging their Windows monopoly is not the innovation that Microsoft seems to think it is. This sort of leveraging has certainly been done before. Any discussion of "innovation" should center on the media player's feature list, not on the ability to enforce a huge installed base. This whole situation merely serves to highlight one of the most important advantages of having an open-source operating system. With open source, no software company can gain an unfair advantage for their proprietary standards by arbitrarily intertwining them into the fabric of the OS. Ironically, Microsoft often ends up making the case for open-source better than anyone else possibly could. |
| #5 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 3/25/2004 5:16:12 PM |
|
"Tell that to Sun and their Java Desktop OS or Novell/SUSE who plan to integrate Netware/SUSE."
What about that press release tells you that now Java and Netware are arbitrarily and inextricably interwoven with the OS? In fact, I've got a copy of Linux running right next to me and yet it doesn't have Netware and Java arbitrarily interwoven into the OS. "Yes it does. It forbids them from distributing a version of Windows XP with Windows Media Player in Europe." No, it doesn't. Microsoft can still distribute a version of Windows XP with Windows Media Player in Europe. They cannot do so exclusively without allowing OEMs and consumers the option to choose an alternative. Not very well-informed, ehh? Oh, I'm dealing with the Par(k)kers! Duh. This post was edited by sodajerk on Thursday, March 25, 2004 at 18:49. |
| #6 By 21912 (24.205.99.194) at 3/25/2004 6:07:17 PM |
|
(sodajerk handled the rebuttal quite well above, so I'll just add this)
The simple fact that Microsoft so vehemently opposes the unbundling of its Media Player seems to show how badly they want the advantage it would give them. I always get a little nervous when Microsoft wants anything so badly that they'll spend millions in legal fees and fines to get it. Does anyone really believe they're fighting that hard for consumers? |
| #7 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 3/25/2004 7:34:30 PM |
|
"It is clear to me that Novell plans to intertwine SUSE Linux (the OS that is based on the Linux Kernel) and Novell Netware, a proprietary OS based on a differrent kernel."
Once again, Parkker, how does that translate to Netware being integrated into Linux. Novell does not produce the only Linux. Please explain to me how in the future Netware and Java will be tied to Linux. In the past, in the present, in the future, anyone will be able to add and/or remove anything they desire from Linux. So how is Novell and Sun going to be responsible for tying Java and Netware to Linux. "The Windows XP OS has been split in 2 in Europe and Microsoft did not want to do that under force." And that is not what you said. I corrected you, you changed your statement. Fine. "A consisten user experience based on common application in the OS is essential to Microsofts plans." And, as some of us have said many, many times already, just because you want to do something or plan on doing somethign doesn't mean you can. How is that, in any way, a defense? "But Microsoft doesn't want to..." No sh**, that's why they keep getting sued for doing illegal things. |
| #8 By 3653 (209.149.57.116) at 3/25/2004 7:44:46 PM |
| May the best lawyers win! |
| #9 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 3/25/2004 8:33:15 PM |
|
#3 "I also want Microsoft to stop bundling notepad with their OS."
BUNDLING is NOT the issue. Forcibly installing and then not allowing you to uninstall it because apparently you've decided to call it a "core component" of the OS IS the issue. Illegally abusing your monopoly (in the US) and near-monopoly (in the EU) to push another one of your products IS the issue. If WMP is such a "core component" then surely if you were to remove it then the OS would no longer run! Apart from the fact that we all know this to not be true and therefore Microsoft are lying once again, there's another side to this... Who the hell designs their OS in such a way where the media player is a "core component"?!?! #6 They don't "need money", calm down, they're not burning your flag. The fine is a penalty for abusing their near-monopoly. The real punishment is the removal of WMP within 90 days and release of all their API's within 120 days. #7 "But if Microsoft can guarantee that their media player has the same monopoly-level market share as the Windows OS itself, that gives them much greater control over critical media production standards, digital rights management, and streaming protocols/file formats. That's a lot of control to have over one of the potentially largest emerging markets that may ever exist, and it's an advantage that no other company can have." Very good - explain to me why this escapes nearly ever single pro-MS-only person? They have as much difficulty understanding that as they do trying to work out the difference between bundling applications and tying applications in with your monopoly OS and calling them "core components". #8 You finally figured it out, even if you are being sarcastic, well done! http://www.nytimes.com/2004/03/24/technology/24soft.html?ex=1080709200&en=81be83eda9c09dad&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE #9 "Yes it does. It forbids them from distributing a version of Windows XP with Windows Media Player in Europe." No it doesn't! It just means that they have to offer a version that DOESN'T have WMP in it. #12 "An Operating System is more than just the kernel." You're right, an OS is the kernel + IE + WMP. The removal of any one of those breaks the OS! #14 "May the best lawyers win!" That and 'lobbying'. Sad but true. #15 "That is the key to understanding the EU ruling. It is anti-consumer. It is designed to hobble Microsoft solely to benefit is competitors. " The key to understanding the US ruling was all the 'lobbying' MS did and to protect the US economy. It didn't take into account consumers at all. This post was edited by chris_kabuki on Thursday, March 25, 2004 at 20:37. |
| #10 By 3339 (64.160.58.135) at 3/25/2004 8:45:15 PM |
|
"I think it is common in the Linux fanatic community to claim Linux is X because X is in one distro, and Linux isn't Y because Y isn't in every distro."
It's not common... It's reality. Just because Novell does something with their distro, that does not make it so for all Linux. Duh! "One brand of Linux, SUSE Linux, is now intertwined or bundled with Netware." And it ca be removed! Well, I'll be! "Bundling is common among Operating System vendors. Microsoft is being told to stop bundling so its competitors can catch up with its own bundling efforts." Baloney! Microsoft is being told to stop bundling because it is a monopoly. Any other company that becomes a monopoly will be told the same. "This decision will be appealed to death for years and Microsoft will win." Process works a lot differently in the EC. Don't be surprised if in 120 days the appeal is rejected and Microsft has no other recourse but complying with the law. "WASHINGTON: The US Justice Department’s antitrust chief said on Wednesday that the huge fine European regulators imposed on Microsoft Corp. was ‘‘unfortunate’’ and that other sanctions against the company could have ‘‘unintended consequences’’. While avoiding direct criticism of the European Commission, Assistant Attorney General Hewitt Pate warned against ‘‘protecting competitors, not competition, in ways that may ultimately harm innovation and the consumers that benefit from it’’. " I could careless about how the Bush adminsitration wants to spin it. According to the Bush Administration Saddam and Osama are good buddies. |
| #11 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 3/25/2004 8:53:00 PM |
|
In other news, the US DOJ (under the Bush Administration - important difference is that the US DOJ under the Clinton Administration were looking at breaking MS up - it's a good thing Bush got it hey!) is upset that the EU has dared to actually punish MS for breaking the law. The DOJ were quick to point out that MS didn't pay them to say this.
#17 "According to the Bush Administration Saddam and Osama are good buddies." Don't forget those WMD!!! We can never forget about all thos WMD that Saddam has and is ready to use against the US within, what was is, 48 hours? Let's all pray that he doesn't launch all of his WMD at once! |
| #12 By 931 (66.180.122.195) at 3/25/2004 9:05:33 PM |
|
Lol, bill should just tack on an extra 10$ for the version without media player.
This is so stupid, it's like telling Ford they have to sell a version of a car without a radio.. (doesn't exist). This is the lamist sh1t ever, especially when microsoft actually offered to include realplayer and others with the next version of windows... but of couse that might actually benifit competator and consumers.. but no, instead they suggest what's actually better for microsoft... a petty fine and version without media player pre-installed.. Big deal; it'll be on the CD with a nice shortcut under accessories to either install it from cd or the web. This is lunicy, like telling GM they can't bundle thier delphi (they own them) sound systems in thier cars... haha Frankly if I were gates I'd just jackup the price of versions without media player by 10-15$ a copy, along with a nice message on the box that says why people are paying more for that version.. sure to make up for the fine :P .. want a servicepack ... ok well mediaplayer get installed with it.. teehee there are so many ways around this lunicy it's not even funny. Not to mention that most consumer chose WMP over most other products out there today anyway. |
| #13 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 3/25/2004 9:12:15 PM |
|
#19 "Lol, bill should just tack on an extra 10$ for the version without media player."
The ruling specifically said that MS cannot charge more for the WMP'less version. "it's like telling Ford" Ford neither have a monopoly, nor have the courts ruled that they have a monopoly (or even a near monpoly), nor have they been found GUILTY of abusing their monpoly. This must be a really difficult point for the pro-MS-only crowd as they just do not seem to get it! |
| #14 By 12071 (203.185.215.149) at 3/25/2004 10:47:47 PM |
|
#22 "Name the law Microsoft broke? Go ahead ... make something up."
EU antitrust law. I'll leave making stuff up to you! http://www.abc.net.au/news/newsitems/s1073141.htm "Software giant Microsoft has been slapped with a record fine for violating European Union antitrust law" "Star chamber justice is not justice." US DOJ Justice bought by 'lobbying' is even further from justice! http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3563697.stm "Microsoft claims that it should not be fined at all because it did not know its behaviour would breach EU law. " Maybe you're one of Microsoft's lawyers! #23 "Microsoft is not a monopoly" Because you said so? You're right, no COURT as yet has ruled Microsoft a monopoly, however the EC and a US court did! http://www.iht.com/articles/511692.html "European Commission not only declared the software company an abusive monopolist, as the U.S. government did in 2000, but levied penalties designed to prevent similar abuses in the future." |
| #15 By 12071 (203.217.77.193) at 3/26/2004 5:33:49 AM |
|
#25 "Name the law."
Do you do anything on your own other than bitch like a little girl when someone says something nasty about Microsoft? Honestly, learn to search. I'll give you a pointer, try Google rather than Microsoft's search technology, it'll actually help you find the things you need. Here is a link to the EC's final decision (so no whinging about "lying"): http://europa.eu.int/rapid/start/cgi/guesten.ksh?p_action.gettxt=gt&doc=IP/04/382|0|RAPID&lg=EN "The European Commission has concluded, after a five-year investigation, that Microsoft Corporation broke European Union competition law by leveraging its near monopoly in the market for PC operating systems (OS) onto the markets for work group server operating systems(1) and for media players(2). " Here are three links to details about the EC's Competition Law: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/citizen/citizen_antitrust_en.html http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/citizen/index_en.html http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/publications/competition_policy_and_the_citizen/en.pdf EC's "near monopoly" meaning "Microsofts operating systems equip more than 95% of the worlds personal computers." "crime to be "ubiquitous"" Can you read? The crime isn't ubiquitous! Windows is! Let's take a look at the definition of the word shall we: ubiquitous:- Being or seeming to be everywhere at the same time; omnipresent. The seems to agree with "Microsofts operating systems equip more than 95% of the worlds personal computers." "a crime to enhance its operating systme "where it faced competition". " Let's have a look at the exact text of the EC shall we: "Microsoft abused its market power by deliberately restricting interoperability between Windows PCs and non-Microsoft work group servers, and by tying its Windows Media Player (WMP), a product where it faced competition, with its ubiquitous Windows operating system." i.e. Not only did Microsoft abuse it's market power but it abused it by typing a product where they there is still some competition to their cash cow, Windows! "The term "abusive monopolist" is not in the ruling at all." I was mearly quoting... if you want something straight from the ruling, fine, they ABUSED their NEAR MONOPOLY =) "The ruling by a bunch of bureaucrats (not a court at all) is a farce." Yes, we'd all rather hear your baseless opinions, FUD and whinging =) |
| #16 By 12071 (203.217.77.193) at 3/26/2004 10:16:03 AM |
| #27 That removes the ICON for WMP not WMP itself. And by unchecking IE or Windows Messenger is that same list, you're once again only removing the icons. |
| #17 By 21912 (24.205.99.194) at 3/26/2004 4:23:13 PM |
|
#29 Thanks, Parkker, for taking the time to interpret European anti-trust law for us. I hope you don't mind if I rely on the European Commission's interpretation and findings, however. They took a great deal more time in their review, and they seem to be aware of legal nuances that you must have missed in your own intensive study.
As for the ruling itself, whether they used the term "monopoly" or "near-monopoly," don't forget that Microsoft was determined to have a monopoly in U.S. District Court also. And you're entirely correct that nothing about having a monopoly is illegal. But the U.S. and the E.U. have placed restrictions on how a company can use its monopoly power to stifle competition and gain an automatic advantage in new markets. The emerging market for digital delivery of media over the internet is too huge and too commercially important for Microsoft to be allowed to leverage its Windows monopoly to gain an unearned advantage for its own proprietary media standards. Let them compete on a level playing field. I would feel differently about this if I believed that playing multimedia files was a core OS function, but I don't agree that it is. History has shown that when forced to do so, Microsoft can produce excellent products capable of winning on merit alone. Let consumers and media providers make their own choices, rather than being herded toward the Microsoft solution simply because it's a built-in part of Windows. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 1 through 25 of 324 Last | Next |
The time now is
5:26:40 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
