• This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn more.

EU Penalties Against Microsoft Upheld

#1
A European Union court on Wednesday upheld penalties imposed by the EU executive on Microsoft, dismissing the software giant's appeal for a suspension, according to a document obtained by Reuters.

The EU's executive Commission levied sanctions and a record fine on Microsoft in March, finding the U.S. company had abused the virtual monopoly of its computer operating system Windows.

Microsoft Corp. appealed against the decision to the EU's second highest court, the Court of First Instance, and asked it to suspend penalties until the main case finishes years from now.

"Microsoft has not demonstrated specifically that it might suffer serious and irreparable damage," the Court document said.

Either side can appeal Wednesday's decision to the EU's highest court, the European Court of Justice.

The decision against Microsoft was made personally by Court of First Instance President Bo Vesterdorf, who found "that Microsoft has not shown that it might suffer serious and irreparable damage as a result of implementation of the contested decision."

The Commission's sanctions ordered Microsoft to provide a version of Windows without its Media Player multimedia software, and to share data on protocols -- software rules of the road -- with makers of work group servers that are used in offices to access files and run printers.

Microsoft had to show that it had a reasonable case, that it urgently needed relief and that the balance of interests between it and the public weighed in its favor.

In the case of the protocols, Vesterdorf said "a number of questions of principle were raised" but "the requirement relating to urgency is not satisfied."

Vesterdorf also rejected the request that he suspend the requirement to sell a version of Windows without its Windows Media Player audio-visual prodcuct.

The Commission argued that the sanctions would be rendered meaningless if delayed, because the market would have moved on.

Microsoft did not seek to avoid a 497 million euro ($665.4 million) fine, less than the billions of dollars it paid this year to settle antitrust cases with other companies.

The Commission ruled that Microsoft bundled its player with Windows to damage such rivals as RealNetworks Inc.'s RealPlayer and Apple Computer Inc.'s QuickTime.

Microsoft was also ordered to give makers of work-group servers information they needed on protocols so they can make systems compatible with those running on Microsoft software.

Microsoft's main appeal will be heard by a three- or five-judge panel of the lower court that will not include Vesterdorf.
Source: Reuters

Anyone else find the WMP charge a little one-sided?
What are your thoughts/comments on the issue in general?
 

Perris Calderon

Moderator
Staff member
Political User
#2
i'm pissed ms is being told they can't give **** away...man does this suck

this decision should also affect windows security programs also...their firewall, their newly aquired anti spy programs like giant

this court is being unreasonable
 

Khayman

I'm sorry Hal...
Political User
#3
yeah, i think they should be allowed to gice away whatever they want.

So what, people get their new machine home, setup it up, wack in a CD and....nothing cause theres no player?

Real is **** and anyone who prefers it to WMP is ....mental!

plus I bet QT comes with Macs

Windows shouldn't come with anything then, any drivers or programs, no notepad or solitare or defrag or anything since someone else also has a similar product
 

ming

OSNN Advanced
#4
Khayman said:
yeah, i think they should be allowed to gice away whatever they want.

So what, people get their new machine home, setup it up, wack in a CD and....nothing cause theres no player?

Real is **** and anyone who prefers it to WMP is ....mental!

plus I bet QT comes with Macs

Windows shouldn't come with anything then, any drivers or programs, no notepad or solitare or defrag or anything since someone else also has a similar product
actually, their defrag comes from diskeeper i think. it looks very similar to the diskeeper app but just a cut down version.
 

Khayman

I'm sorry Hal...
Political User
#5
ming said:
actually, their defrag comes from diskeeper i think. it looks very similar to the diskeeper app but just a cut down version.
Yeah it is, but theres other defrag programs, therefore windows shouldn't come with one.

Its all pointless anyway OEM's can put whatever crap they like on new systems. but If i buy an OS from abox then i want ot be aply to play music!
 

hawedi

supermod@windows-board.de
#7
OK - you may discuss about this foolish lawsuit. But don`t forget it was an US Software Company named SUN Microsystem who forced this anti-trust claim. Different to the legal dispute in USA it was ostensible a war of dominance in server markets.
 
#8
Khayman said:
So what, people get their new machine home, setup it up, wack in a CD and....nothing cause theres no player?
That's exactly the point. Any modern OS should come with a basic set of tools and applications that make the out-of-the-box experience easy and convenient.

Basically, all this ruling is doing is putting Windows at a disadvantage compared to other systems, rather than making it a "level-playing field" as they claim to be doing. Let's say Joe User wants to buy a new computer. Is he going to buy a stripped down version of Windows that does absolutely nothing out-of-the-box, or a Mac with the iLife suite that does everything he needs right after he opens it? The choice is obvious.

The moral of the story? Don't ever become big and successful, because the underdogs will always be bitching and trying to pull you down. Absolutely pathetic.

And as you said, Khayman, Apple does bundle QT with the OS. Not only that, every new Macintosh ships with the whole iLife suite of applications, including Safari, iTunes, iMovie, iCal etc. What makes Apple immune to such laws? The fact that they own a miniscule fraction of the market? Why should that be a criterion anyway? Personally, I don't agree with the ruling at all, and I feel both Apple and MS should be allowed to include what they feel is appropriate. But if you're going to restrain, make it universal. Don't just aim for the biggest fish because that's where the money is.

Did you also know that MS proposed that it would include two other media players with the OS as a settlement, but the proposal was turned down?

I was very disappointed by the outcome of all this. The courts just pushed things a little too far. :ermm:
 

Members online

No members online now.

Latest posts

Latest profile posts

Electronic Punk wrote on Perris Calderon's profile.
All good still mate?
Hello, is there anybody in there? Just nod if you can hear me ...
Xie
What a long strange trip it's been. =)

Forum statistics

Threads
61,961
Messages
673,239
Members
89,015
Latest member
evaiwhitis