backtop


Print E-mail del.icio.us 207 comment(s) - last by Keeir.. on Oct 29 at 7:49 PM


EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes
Microsoft finally gives in to the EU's demands

Software juggernaut Microsoft has been involved in an ongoing legal battle with the European Union since a 2004 antitrust ruling was handed down. When DailyTech last looked into the European Union v. Microsoft case, Microsoft was rather reserved after learning that it lost its appeal.

"So, we look forward to continued efforts to implement and comply with today’s decision," said Microsoft senior vice president and general counsel Brad Smith in September. "We welcome the opportunity for continued discussion to adhere to our duties with the European Commission, and we look forward to hopefully continuing to move technology forward to create more jobs on this continent."

It appears now that Microsoft is finally giving up its fight with the European Commission. EU Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes personally spoke with Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer on the phone earlier this morning and reached a definitive agreement in regards to compliance with the ruling.

"I welcome that Microsoft has finally undertaken concrete steps to ensure full compliance with the 2004 decision," said Kroes. "It is regrettable that Microsoft has only complied after a considerable delay, two court decisions, and the imposition of daily penalty payments."

"As of today, the major issues concerning compliance have been resolved," Kroes added. "It is a victory day for the consumer... not the Commission."

According to the agreement, Microsoft will have to comply with three separate changes to its business.

  1. Software competitors must be given access to Microsoft interoperability information.
  2. Royalties for said information will be a one-time payment of €10,000 ($14,348 USD).
  3. Worldwide software license/patent royalties will be reduced from 5.95 percent to 0.4 percent.

Should Microsoft fail to comply with any of these changes, "the agreements will be enforceable before the High Court in London, and will provide for effective remedies, including damages, for third-party developers in the event that Microsoft breaches those agreements," according to the European ommission.

For its part, Microsoft simply stated that it will "work closely with the commission and the industry to ensure a flourishing and competitive environment for information technology."

In July 2006, Microsoft was fined €497 million ($710 million USD) for as a result of the 2004 antitrust ruling. The commission then raised the cap on Microsoft’s daily fines from $2.6 million USD to $3.8 million USD in July 2006. Two days later, Microsoft was fined an additional $375.4 million USD in July 2006 for failing to comply with the ruling. Microsoft lost its appeal on September 17, 2007 and the initial €497 million fine was upheld.

In addition to the fine, Microsoft must also pay 80 percent of the European Commission's legal expenses.



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

WTH
By SunAngel on 10/22/2007 9:23:05 AM , Rating: 3
<!--[if !supportLists]--> Software competitors must be given access to Microsoft interoperability information.
Royalties for said information will be a one-time payment of €10,000 ($14,348 USD).
Worldwide software license/patent royalties will be reduced from 5.95 percent to 0.4 percent.

How in the world (EU) can they make MS accept 4 hundreds of a percent euro for something that is entirely negoitable by developers and MS? Seems really harsh.

Of course, many including myself, disagree with MS's business practices, but negotiating is what makes the world market "free".




RE: WTH
By mdogs444 on 10/22/2007 9:27:00 AM , Rating: 2
As we've seen, the EU is not about what is right, and a right to free market.

If i were MS, id pull all MS products off the shelves in europe and stop selling my OS completely there. Give them an all or nothing approach. They have proved they can require you to give other companies access to your information for making your OS available in the country, but they cannot force you to sell your product there.


RE: WTH
By zombiexl on 10/22/2007 9:30:47 AM , Rating: 5
Theres probably some law in the EU that wouldnt allow MS to pull their products. That or they'll invent such a law...


RE: WTH
By mdogs444 on 10/22/07, Rating: 0
RE: WTH
By SunAngel on 10/22/2007 9:51:14 AM , Rating: 1
Obviously, MS would never pull their products from the EU markets. Certainly with the lower royalties, MS will still make money.

My point was to say another freedom (negotiation) has been removed. This is not only going to affect MS but will set a precedent that other companies will have to follow. Otherwise there will be inconsistencies in the law if it is applied to some and not others.

Frontend charges for MS products are surely much less than the royalties they receive (over the product's lifetime). Any company's revenue (not only MS) will be severely resticted assuming they continue to charge current prices and not raise the acquistion price for their products.

Seems to me, and I am by no means an economist, this decision is going to stiffle R&D because the money is just not going to be their to allow engineers to get done what needs to be done.


RE: WTH
By defter on 10/22/2007 9:57:32 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
My point was to say another freedom (negotiation) has been removed. This is not only going to affect MS but will set a precedent that other companies will have to follow. Otherwise there will be inconsistencies in the law if it is applied to some and not others.


This has nothing to with removal of freedom and it isn't a precedent. The law (at least the law of the civilized countries) clearly says that a holder of a patent/rights that are essential for interoperability, must license them for a reasonable price to others. This requirement is essential to encourage competition.


RE: WTH
By SunAngel on 10/22/2007 10:10:40 AM , Rating: 3
quote:
must license them for a reasonable price to others. This requirement is essential to encourage competition.


Exactly!

Who determines the price as reasonable? Microsoft? The developer? A third party?

How and when did it become a crime to charge what the market is willing to pay? I want to buy a share of Google's stock, but at $600+/share it to rich for my blood. I might be able to persude someone to sell me a share for $1, but they may be losing $599+. Should I run to the EU commission and say, "Hey, I can't purchase a share of stock because the price is too high. Can you please help me out with this?"


RE: WTH
By Xavian on 10/22/2007 10:27:45 AM , Rating: 5
The point was, that Microsoft wouldn't licence interopolity with its software for any price.

Which went against the laws of the EU.


RE: WTH
By FITCamaro on 10/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: WTH
By Murst on 10/22/2007 11:12:23 AM , Rating: 5
quote:
Not selling a license for interoperability should not be illegal. It should be a business decision. The market will determine whether it is a wise one or not.

Your statement does not apply to companies that have been declared monopolies. They do not get the same treatment as companies that have competitors.

BTW, I think that out of all the EU's demands, this is the most reasonable one. Such is the price of being a monopoly, and people can cry and moan about how bad MS is being treated, yet I'd like to see a company that wouldn't want to be in MS's shoes (if MS could have shoes, that is).


RE: WTH
By FITCamaro on 10/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: WTH
By Murst on 10/22/2007 12:16:02 PM , Rating: 2
Here is the ruling. Its far too large to summarize here. Skip to section II ("Relevant Market") for an answer to your question.

http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm#...


RE: WTH
By nofranchise on 10/22/2007 12:20:02 PM , Rating: 1
It might be considered "low", but I'm doing it anyway:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monopoly

I mean come on Camaro... I found it more satisfying to read your posts bashing the EU.


RE: WTH
By FITCamaro on 10/22/07, Rating: -1
RE: WTH
By mars777 on 10/22/2007 1:39:36 PM , Rating: 4
quote:
Software juggernaut Microsoft has been involved in an ongoing legal battle with the European Union since a 2004 antitrust ruling was handed down


Where do you read the word "monopoly" ?
I see only antitrust, which is a set of laws restricting monopolistic behavior (and you don't have to be a monopoly to behave in monopolistic manner, merely have a large chunk of market).

Basically these laws exist to stop MS and the like becoming a monopoly.

Technically having 90% market share is not a definition to monopoly, but is the closest you can get when you round to 1/10 :)


RE: WTH
By Oregonian2 on 10/22/2007 2:52:00 PM , Rating: 2
Microsoft has a monopoly in the 100% Microsoft OS compatible OS market. For that reason, the EU can control Microsoft no matter what.


RE: WTH
By Farfignewton on 10/23/2007 7:01:29 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
This is a mute point these days


Uh, "moot" point? ;)