'No Alternative' To Microsoft Fine 394
An anonymous reader writes "News.com is running an interview with Neelie Kroes, the competition commissioner for the EU. She confirms that the massive fines to Microsoft are absolutely necessary, and goes into some of the commissions reasons for slapping the giant down." From the article: "Microsoft has claimed that its obligations in the decision are not clear, or that the obligations have changed. I cannot accept this characterization--Microsoft's obligations are clearly outlined in the 2004 decision and have remained constant since then. Indeed, the monitoring trustee appointed in October 2005, from a shortlist put forward by Microsoft, believes that the decision clearly outlines what Microsoft is required to do. I must say that I find it difficult to imagine that a company like Microsoft does not understand the principles of how to document protocols in order to achieve interoperability. "
Legal circles? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:"There's words in this, I can't understand word (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:280m Euros (Score:2, Interesting)
The problem with the EU is that they will let Microsoft drag this out indefinitely, their "diplomatic" process allows for it. The likelihood of Microsoft forking over this money is nil.
Re:"There's words in this, I can't understand word (Score:5, Interesting)
They said that it was the most secure Windows so far; are you disputing this?
revealing Windows security flaws should be halted by the Department of Homeland Security as it represents a threat to businesses which use the software
I can actually see the logic in that. I do not agree with it (if one person has found an exploitable flaw, chances are someone else has or will), but it's not an entirely stupid idea on the face of it (you have to think about it to realise how dangerous it is).
no liability is expressed or implied by the jokers who make billions selling it, however
Very very few software licences do not disclaim liability, the GPL included. It's extremely hard (and time consuming, and so expensive) to create software that can be guaranteed exploit-free, and this difficulty increases as the complexity of the software increases.
Thanks EU for having some balls, which the US DoJ doesn't.
Well there's one thing we can agree on. I personally think that MS's software often gets too raw a deal here, but some of their business practices are deplorable. It's nice to see that someone finally has the guts to stand up to them and actually impose the punishment they threatened them with for a change.
No Alternative for MS either (Score:2, Interesting)
Even this fine is nothing. Equivalent to ten days profits.
All this is is a simple tariff on doing buisiness in the EU.
Paying the fine is the most economic alternative for MS.
The Microsoft Protocol (Score:4, Interesting)
Obviously, Neelie is not a programmer and has never tried to write a program in a Microsoft environment, or even tried to figure out what their documentation is supposed to mean... If anything.
The example below is my favourite piece of Microsoftism, from the "I cannot believe that I am actually writing this" department:
IXMLDOMDocumentPtr pXML = NULL;
...
HRESULT hr = pXML.CreateInstance(_uuidof(DomDocument40));
pXML->async = VARIANT_FALSE;
pXML->validateOnParse = VARIANT_FALSE;
pXML.Release();
And yes, this compiles and works. Surely there must be other gems of Microsoft protocols out there. Any other proposals?
I believe the Comission is wrong, and the companies that are lobbying the commission to get access to these protocols are even more wrong. We should not want more software that relies on more Microsoftisms. Au contraire.
I wish I had a list of the companies that are sueing for these protocols being made public. Then I would at least know whose software I certainly do not want to buy.
Re:She doesn't get it (Score:2, Interesting)
Microsoft is surely already selling at prices which maximize their profit. If they were selling at a lower price, they wouldn't need a fine from the EU to convince them to raise it; they just would, because they'd make more money that way. Since they haven't done so pre-fine, what makes you think they would do so post-fine?
Of course this would be more complicated if they were being fined per copy, or per customer, or some other strange scheme, but they're being fined *per day*. The only thing MS can do to reduce their fine is to somehow operate during fewer days (?) or comply with the EU's demands and end the fine entirely. Irrationally raising prices (and thus *hurting* their bottom line) does neither of those things.
Re:Good luck Microsoft (Score:1, Interesting)
Your statement is also correct, and the meanings are different. Knowing both meanings, both wordings is important. It works both ways. "Those who have the gold make the rules" recognizes the reality that the rich use their influence to influence law and policy. "Those who make the rules get the gold" recognizes the reality that those in government use its unrivaled power to enrich and empower themselves. If you deny the reality of both, you aren't a civically-aware person and should really stay away from the voting booth or else you might cause some real damage.
Cash or gift vouchers? (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:As much as I hate microsoft product... (Score:2, Interesting)
If Microsoft wants to play on our playground, they will have to play by our rules. Do you think that is unfair?
Re:Really? (Score:3, Interesting)
If a company refuses to pay a fine, they just send in the bailiffs. They go into all Microsoft offices anywhere in Europe and confiscate anything of value. Desks, chairs, any software lying around, computers. That stuff will then be auctioned off. You might be able to buy Microsoft Office quite cheaply. If that isn't enough money, they confiscate all money in bank accounts anywhere in Europe. Which means that Microsoft employees will not get paid. If that isn't enough money, they order all major customers to make payments not to Microsoft anymore. If that is not enough, bankruptcy proceedings will be started.
Not playing a fine is a very, very bad idea for any company.
Why do you care? (Score:2, Interesting)
Do you worry where your speeding ticket goes?
Why do you care about where this goes.
It'll go the same place they always go.
would you prefer MS kept the money?
I got an alternative..... (Score:4, Interesting)
-Em
Re:"There's words in this, I can't understand word (Score:1, Interesting)
That's true -- and most of their OEM contracts ("trusts") were tossed out, and all their competitors sued them for billions of dollars.
But ultimately, the courts upheld the fundemental sancitity of Windows as a product, so no justification for breakup, or fines, or special N(eutered) editions. Bush didn't do that -- it was the courts.
The documentation issue may be their Hara-Kiri... (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:They DON'T want to be interoperable.. (Score:1, Interesting)
Sure they do... (Score:4, Interesting)
I have heard enough of their sales pitches to know that Microsoft's concept of interoperability is simpe and they grasp it quite well: "Throw out every piece of software that you currently operate that isn't made by Microsoft and exchange it for equivalent Microsoft products. After that everyting will inter-operate just fine so long as you don't stray form the yellow brick Microsoft road."
Re:Oh boy... (Score:1, Interesting)
Who else would belive a Press release from any company where they whimper about been treated badly and nothing is there fault?
For you can't really belive this shit from MicroSoft, can you?
Professor Barrett and his team has been there for MS to ask for what to do, and they didn't approach him until this year. It is he who will be the one who tell when MS comply, not any commissioner. So IF they have had any questions, they could have asked him a year ago.
For gods sake, they have had since December 2004 to comply to the final decission, after long talks etc. And they didn't start until April 2006 to ask and start makeing the documentation, not beginning of 2005.
He had told the Commission that they have at last started to work on it, but they ar not there yet. There are still lots of work to comply to the terms from the Commission.
Of course there work for comply is massive, like MS complain about. They sound like ANY student who don't do there home work until last day, or hour even. They SHOULD suffer.
I handle this kind of behavour each semester in my courses. And I don't care much about any whining from students after dead lines has passed. If the talk to me before deadline, there is another issue, but not if they don't even bother to ask befor. It's not my fault, neither the EU Commissions when MS don't deliver or care to deliver on time.
They got what they deserve from not starting working with there home work in time before deadline.
Re:"There's words in this, I can't understand word (Score:3, Interesting)
That's how this game is played, folks.
Reality check.... (Score:2, Interesting)
How many times have we seen this kind of game from MS? Oh sure, they may actually have to pay EUR280 mil this time, but will that really hurt them, come on, the company still has BILLIONS in cash reserves.
M$ will just try and appeal or negociate to pay as little as they can, then pull it out of their cash fund or something and NOTHING WILL CHANGE.
Until the really big players start telling MS to go to hell and M$ starts getting hit HARD (billion $ fines anyone?) they will just continue as before.
I'm not going to hold my breath.
Re:Oh boy... (Score:3, Interesting)
In the Netherlands, she was one of the politicians that actually got things done when she was in the government.
Not my political colours, but effective nontheless...