So here we are, a quick recap of the essential points of this decision may be well needed after this long exposition. If you came here directly from the title the points may seem mere assumptions, thus I suggest you to read up here, anyway, here we go:
-Microsoft was fined for a sum of money that is surely important, but only if you do forget that we are speaking of a company that declares an annual income of 53 billion dollars. Relax, they'll survive.
-Microsoft, following this decision has to give away, not later of 120 day, the DOCUMENTATION regarding the protocol of dialog between the client side and the server side.
Furthermore, this is limited to the client side and no API code is asked at all. Top of that, this documentation has not to be given free, but has to be sold where it regards technologies that are under the protection of the patent law of the UE. The documentation has to be brought up to date while the technology changes, so to permit to competitors to be always in position to adapt their programs.
-Microsoft has to offer not later than 90 days from the decision a version of Windows that has been stripped down from it's media player. The two version may co-exist on the market, but the stripped down version has to be commercially interesting and not offered as a worst product (so that customers do not think at it like a leftover).
Customers that buy a computer with pre-installed OS have to ask explicitly for the installation of WMP; if they buy a computer with no preinstalled or bundled OS, they are free to choose wich copy of the OS they like to have.
-Microsoft was sentenced for abuse of it's monopolistic dominant position, after 4 years enquire by the European commission lead by Mario Monti; an agreement could not be found from both sides and MS has appealed to the Court of Justice in Louxembourg that will now decide.
Final statement
So, what remains to add? That it is surely a complex decision, built on a attentive and strict enquiry, that made large use of technical experts offered by both parts and thus permitted to open an interesting window (pardon me the pun) on a problem that could really badly turn out as the final taking over by Microsoft of the PC market.
Aside from the consideration about law men messing with things they (usually) do not really understand, re reading the commission's enquiry acts the fact that jumps the most at your eyes is the accurate study from the point of view of understanding the idea that was behind the technology. Technology, in whichever form it appears in our lives, is surely one of the path of progress, but there cannot be any progress if you leave the field lawless and without regulation that permits to re equilibrate the market.
It remains only to await patiently for the decision of the European Court of Justice and see what happens. As we use to say in Italy "Who'll live, will see". There is some measure of wisdom in old saying...
About the author:
Gianluca Casu was appointed Law Doctor by the university of Pisa, law faculty, in the field of industrial and commercial rights. He is actually earning, in the
same university, a master degree in private companies and management of public companies right. He works as Artistic director for a renown press house in
Italy and is a dedicated geek. He has used a great number of OS's in his life and comes a long way from the prehistory of computers (Rest in peace trusted C64).
He is actually trying to take over the world, but is poorly succeeding in the task.
- "EU punishes MS, Page 1/4"
- "EU punishes MS, Page 2/4"
- "EU punishes MS, Page 3/4"
- "EU punishes MS, Page 4/4"
