To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
They dont come up with the figure from thin air you know, just the same way a judge comes up with a figure for you to pay something. From what I've seen it's based on a percentage of what you earn or gross.
Microsoft earn alot of money so the fine will be big to you and me, if a smaller company did the same thing it wouldn't be the same figure because they profit less.
Edited 2008-02-27 19:12 UTC
Yeah its almost like RIAA wants you to pay a million and a half per album you pirated.
do you actually know what the EU does?
Yes, the fine is big, BUT microsoft would not have those kind of sums in the bank had it not denied the competition
The reason no-one wanted the non media player version was it was the same price as the version WITH (in the uk at least)
The difference in the WMP case and in this case, is that in the WMP case, Microsoft was force to offer to version of Windows for the same price and with one version beeing inferior to the other one. While in this case Microsoft is asked to release documentation about Windows API and protocols, for a reasonable price.
The DG Competition can ask 5% of the daily turnover for each day of non-compliance. Microsoft had to be compliant within 90 days after the Court of First Instance decided they did need to comply.
What they did is count the number of non-compliant days multiply with the daily fines, and subtract the non-compliance fine from 2006.
Back in 2006 the DG Competition did not fine the full 5% (if I remember well 3%) and warned the remaining money would be fined if Big M would still be incompliant. Apparantly this is what happened today (plus the full 5% daily fines after the 2006 fine).
It should be noted that Microsoft now is being considered compliant (the new terms allowed Samba to buy the documentation), but apparently they didn't get forgiveness for the non-compliant period since the previous fines in 2006.
Easy.
The calculation is made on the period in which Microsoft broke the law and is a percentage variable between 3.5 and 11.4 depending on the gravity of the illecit income made in consequence of the felony.
Funny fact.
If the morons at Microsoft had just paied in first place instead in dragging the discussion for years (hoping the EU will starve on the way) they would have to pay less due to a shorter period of infringement.
Well written Law are such a bitch 







Member since:
2005-07-06
That fine is crazy. I'd like to know where the EU came up with such a high figure.