Microsoft Hands Over Docs To EU 265
hankwang writes "Reuters reports that Microsoft has handed over technical documents to the EU in order to enable the competition to make interoperable software. So far, the EU has imposed fines of €497 M and €280 M onto Microsoft for abuse of its monopoly. The deadline for this documentation was today. According to Microsoft, the documentation is over 8500 pages."
Error in TFB (Score:5, Informative)
That EU Press Release (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:5, Informative)
You obviously have no idea what you are talking about. The EU has judged Microsoft to be abusing a monopoly position in the global european market. That's a big no-no for the EU Commission, since the whole "European" idea is based on free circulation of goods, people and financial instruments. In other words, the EU is against monopolies and large companies locking customers in their line of products and services. Is that so hard to understand?
To counter-balance this monopoly position, the EU has asked Microsoft to supply its competitors -- including many European companies -- with the necessary documentation. That documentation was required to open Microsoft files (.WMV, for instance) and communicate with machines running Windows system (SMB protocol). Microsoft refused and was fined a lot of money. Microsoft said it was going to comply, then delivered the required documentation. End of story.
As far as I know, havin inter-operability between Microsoft products and competitors is a Good Thing(tm). You can thank the EU for that.
Re:shocking (Score:2, Informative)
Probably xtra presents, maybe it is cheap for the effect: (from TFA) " At this point, some of the major commercial businesses which needed the documents have exited the market."
CC.
Re:Error in TFB (Score:1, Informative)
For the Euro sign is a suffix not a prefix like $ or £..
Re:8500 pages (Score:5, Informative)
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:2, Informative)
Microsoft's not a monopoly: you're perfectly free to create your own standard (as the OO crowd is trying to do). Surely you'll admit that it's not Microsoft's fault that such standards aren't catching on?
Personally I don't use OO because I can't swap files with people with whom I co-author scientific articles. MS Office and Open Office equations STILL don't work right (and before you LaTeX fanatics step in, neither of us speak that language).
Since I get my MS Office for free, why should I even consider OO?
Recently? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:5, Informative)
Everyone seems to forget that they were found to be a Monopoly in both EU and US.
On the European side, they were found to be illegally abusing their monopolistic powers.
On the US side, basically a few people sued them and nothing really big came from it. (Of course this is the summary and you can go read all the archives regarding this long ordeal.)
So yes, when some raging abuse of a corporation has grown out of control... the government steps in and evens things out a little bit.
Well, there is the unenlightened summary of why monopolies can be beaten with a stick and it's alright.
(It's turkey day, I'll leave it to someone else to go into a discussion about the benefits of interoperability and monopolistic standards.)
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Error in TFB (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:3, Informative)
How to get them (Score:5, Informative)
For those of you asking how to get the documents: they're not available free of charge. Microsoft has handed over documents for checking, and has explained how it wants to license them.
The EU is going to decide three things: whether the documents satisfy their requirements, whether the price is reasonable (based on Microsoft's original contribution instead of their monopoly position), and whether the proposed license is reasonable.
If they decide this will do, then Microsoft has to make the documentation available for people wanting to buy it under those license terms for that price; if they decide against, then Microsoft still hasn't complied and will get more fines.
It never was about documentation available without strings attached, that would be too unreasonable.
See the Washington Post [washingtonpost.com]: The Commission's decision, it recalled, required Microsoft to "disclose and license complete and accurate interface documentation [...] and Microsoft could face further fines if the Commission finds that the price was based on Microsoft's exercise of monopoly power, rather than on the originality of its product.
Re:Error in TFB (Score:2, Informative)
Never ever saw a price written with € as a prefix.
The United Kingdom doesn't use Euro and English speakers are more familiar with the prefix usage ($ and £), that would be my guess why this English document is written that way..
Re:Error in TFB (Score:3, Informative)
In languages other than English there are different conventions. But you wouldn't argue that an amount of one and a half euros should be written 1,50 instead of 1.50 just because lots of Euroland countries use a comma instead of a decimal point.
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Bullshit (Score:3, Informative)
At the time I wrote this you had been modded insightful... why any reasonable modder would do that I don't know.
Re:Nobody To Cheer For (Score:3, Informative)
This has been discussed before. Microsoft is a monopoly, under the legal definitions of several jurisdictions. And it makes sense. From Wikipedia [wikipedia.org]:
Primary characteristics of a monopoly