Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 17th Sep 2007 15:17 UTC, submitted by Rahul
Legal Microsoft suffered a stunning defeat on Monday when a European Union court backed a European Commission ruling that the US software giant illegally abused its market power to crush competitors. The European Union's second-highest court dismissed the company's appeal on all substantive points of the 2004 antitrustruling. The court said Microsoft, the world's largest software maker, was unjustified in tying new applications to its Windows operating system in a way that harmed consumer choice. The verdict, which may be appealed only on points of law and not of fact, could force Microsoft to change its business practices.
Thread beginning with comment 271969
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
As you might expect
by Almafeta on Mon 17th Sep 2007 15:40 UTC
Almafeta
Member since:
2007-02-22

The verdict, which may be appealed only on points of law and not of fact


That pretty much describes these trials.

The court said Microsoft, the world's largest software maker, was unjustified in tying new applications to its Windows operating system in a way that harmed consumer choice.


So when will the injunctions against Canonical, Novell, Red Hat, etc., be coming?

Edited 2007-09-17 15:44 UTC

Reply Score: -7

RE: As you might expect
by Vanders on Mon 17th Sep 2007 15:43 in reply to "As you might expect"
Vanders Member since:
2005-07-06

Go on then, astonish us all with your firm grasp of the legal issues involved.

Reply Parent Score: 8

RE: As you might expect
by dylansmrjones on Mon 17th Sep 2007 15:50 in reply to "As you might expect"
dylansmrjones Member since:
2005-10-02

Dear Almafeta.

Microsoft is harming consumer choice by making its products irremovable (e.g. they cannot be uninstalled). Red Hat ships a distribution with many applications, but they can ALL be removed, and modified and whatever the user may want. Even legally. Microsoft does not allow that.

Novell, Canonical, IBM and several other companies do the same. They are tying applications but not in a way that harms consumer choice (e.g. they are not limiting the amount of choices for Users).

Reply Parent Score: 12

v RE[2]: As you might expect
by Almafeta on Mon 17th Sep 2007 15:55 in reply to "RE: As you might expect"
RE[2]: As you might expect
by diegocg on Mon 17th Sep 2007 16:40 in reply to "RE: As you might expect"
diegocg Member since:
2005-07-08

No....this is mostly about Microsoft NOT publishing some propietary protocols. It's funny that Microsoft tries to look like they're standard-friendly with OOXMNL, but in reality they are not.

Reply Parent Score: 6

RE[2]: As you might expect
by TaterSalad on Mon 17th Sep 2007 17:15 in reply to "RE: As you might expect"
TaterSalad Member since:
2005-07-06

I disagree with you completely. While you may not be able to remove certain products you can choose not to use them. I'm not sure why you would want to remove them anyway. It's true you can remove products from Red Hat but it isn't easy and uninstalls other applications along with it. I've had functional linux boxes become unfunctional due to removing one application that decided it wanted to remove a slew of other ones as well.

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE: As you might expect
by ichi on Mon 17th Sep 2007 15:53 in reply to "As you might expect"
ichi Member since:
2007-03-06

"So when will the injunctions against Canonical, Novell, Red Hat, etc., be coming?"

When they fall in the actual relevant part of that sentence:

"The court said Microsoft, the world's largest software maker, was unjustified in tying new applications to its Windows operating system in a way that harmed consumer choice".

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: As you might expect
by LB06 on Mon 17th Sep 2007 16:05 in reply to "As you might expect"
LB06 Member since:
2005-07-06

The most important issue is not mentioned in the article: it's not really a problem that Microsoft bundles software; everyone does that. Even the fact that something cannot be removed does not have to be a problem, persť. The big problem with Microsoft is that it is abusing its monopoly on the desktop to gain monopoly in other area's such as the world of media players and servers, for example.

Here's the press release: http://curia.europa.eu/en/actu/communiques/cp07/aff/cp070063en.pdf

Edited 2007-09-17 16:13

Reply Parent Score: 13

RE[2]: As you might expect
by anda_skoa on Mon 17th Sep 2007 19:17 in reply to "RE: As you might expect"
anda_skoa Member since:
2005-07-07

The big problem with Microsoft is that it is abusing its monopoly on the desktop to gain monopoly in other area's such as the world of media players and servers, for example.


Exactly!

And as expected, the spinmeisters neatly ignore the real problem but instead focus on the bundling detail.

This results in less informed people to see just the arguments about media players and browser instead of learning about the issues that for example media server technology providers have run into because not being treated equally by the default media player.

I wish that instead of requesting a separate player-less bundle such rulings would request having competing client side technology equally bundled, i.e. all currently available codec being equally pre-installed or equally available through automatic download.

Reply Parent Score: 7

RE: As you might expect
by SReilly on Mon 17th Sep 2007 16:10 in reply to "As you might expect"
SReilly Member since:
2006-12-28

That pretty much describes these trials.

You are so far off the mark with that one, it's not even funny. When both the US and the EU find a company to be abusing it's market position and actively harming consumer choice than I, and anybody with an ounce of sense, am going to believe them. To do otherwise is to stick your head in the sand or stick your fingers in your ears while loudly shouting out 'I can't hear you!'.

So when will the injunctions against Canonical, Novell, Red Hat, etc., be coming?

When they start tying applications into they're offering without the ability to uninstall those applications. That's when.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: As you might expect
by Jokel on Mon 17th Sep 2007 16:15 in reply to "As you might expect"
Jokel Member since:
2006-06-01

You ask "So when will the injunctions against Canonical, Novell, Red Hat, etc., be coming?"

My answer is... As soon as they also own 95% of the market and can dictate only Linux will be sold on new computers!

Edited 2007-09-17 16:24

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: As you might expect
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 17th Sep 2007 16:58 in reply to "As you might expect"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

So when will the injunctions against Canonical, Novell, Red Hat, etc., be coming?


Well, I don't think it will be long before the EU will take on Apple's iPod/iTunes monopoly practices. In addition, if Apple does not provide its own methods of unlocking the iPhone in many countries in Europe where they must do so according to the law (The Netherlands, for instance), the EU will surely talk about that one too.

Edited 2007-09-17 17:00 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 1

RE[2]: As you might expect
by mcduck on Mon 17th Sep 2007 18:12 in reply to "As you might expect"
mcduck Member since:
2005-11-23

self-edited, off topic.

Edited 2007-09-17 18:18

Reply Parent Score: 0

RE[3]: As you might expect
by Thom_Holwerda on Mon 17th Sep 2007 18:15 in reply to "RE[2]: As you might expect"
Thom_Holwerda Member since:
2005-06-29

While i strongly disagree with this poster, why the heck is he voted down to -5?


Please don't complain about moderation in the comments' section. They invented email for this stuff.

Reply Parent Score: 1