Comment Please, try to understand what it is all about! (Score 2) 337
Some of you seem not to have understand what this is all about. The questions is NOT whether Microsoft has a monopoly or not. This has been shown in US and EU courts that on the desktop market they DO have a monopoly (which legally does not necessarily mean that you have 100% of the market). Thus Microsoft have to follow rules that apply to companies in monopoly situations.
One such rule (in EU and US) is that you aren't allowed to exploit your dominating position so as to extend your monopoly into other areas. Thus Microsoft cannot suddenly change Windows so that Firefox stops working, without giving Firefox a fair chance to adapt to the changes. In a number of cases during the years, Microsoft has failed to live up to this rule and sometimes driven companies our of business.
Next... The question is NOT whether Microsoft has illegitimately exploited its current monopoly. This has been shown in both US and EU courts. In the case we are talking about today, Microsoft has exploited its monopoly on desktops to leverage their server solutions, by keeping the protocols for interaction secret. Note, this is something that only applies to companies in monopoly situations. If you were a small player you may keep everything secret, but if you have a monopoly you have to act with care.
The questions is rather, what do we do about it? By the EU court Microsoft has been given two alternatives, 1) pay a 2M Euro fine a day, or 2) publish documents regarding the protocols so that competitors are given a chance to compete. Note the EU court has NOT asked for the source code, it has asked for documentation.
Is the source code enough documentation in itself? Well... why do programmers need documentation? Because... browsing through millions of lines of code takes an enormous amount of time, especially as it is in constant change. Competitors need to know WHAT something does, not HOW it is done.
One such rule (in EU and US) is that you aren't allowed to exploit your dominating position so as to extend your monopoly into other areas. Thus Microsoft cannot suddenly change Windows so that Firefox stops working, without giving Firefox a fair chance to adapt to the changes. In a number of cases during the years, Microsoft has failed to live up to this rule and sometimes driven companies our of business.
Next... The question is NOT whether Microsoft has illegitimately exploited its current monopoly. This has been shown in both US and EU courts. In the case we are talking about today, Microsoft has exploited its monopoly on desktops to leverage their server solutions, by keeping the protocols for interaction secret. Note, this is something that only applies to companies in monopoly situations. If you were a small player you may keep everything secret, but if you have a monopoly you have to act with care.
The questions is rather, what do we do about it? By the EU court Microsoft has been given two alternatives, 1) pay a 2M Euro fine a day, or 2) publish documents regarding the protocols so that competitors are given a chance to compete. Note the EU court has NOT asked for the source code, it has asked for documentation.
Is the source code enough documentation in itself? Well... why do programmers need documentation? Because... browsing through millions of lines of code takes an enormous amount of time, especially as it is in constant change. Competitors need to know WHAT something does, not HOW it is done.
