Microsoft to pay $613 million fine

[baggio248]

EU orders Microsoft
to pay $613 million fine
Software giant found guilty
of abusing ‘near monopoly

The Associated Press
Updated: 11:45 a.m. ET March 24, 2004BRUSSELS, Belgium - The European Union declared Microsoft Corp. guilty Wednesday of abusing its "near monopoly" with Windows to squeeze competitors in other markets and levied a record fine of $613 million (497.2 million euros).

The EU’s antitrust authority said that “because the illegal behavior is still ongoing,” it was also demanding changes in the way the U.S. software company operates. (MSNBC is a Microsoft-NBC joint venture.)

It gave Microsoft 90 days to offer a version of Windows to PC manufacturers without its digital media player, and 120 days for Microsoft to release “complete and accurate” programming code to rivals in the server market, so their products can have “full interoperability” with desktop computers running Windows.

“Dominant companies have a special responsibility to ensure that the way they do business doesn’t prevent competition ... and does not harm consumers and innovation,” EU Competition Commissioner Mario Monti said.

“Today’s decision restores the conditions for fair competition in the markets concerned and establishes clear principles for the future conduct of a company with such a strong dominant position.”

Appeal process
Microsoft has just over two months to file its promised appeal. It also is expected to ask the EU’s Court of First Instance to suspend the order during the appeal process, which could take years.

The order goes beyond the 2001 U.S. settlement on similar antitrust charges and aims at the heart of Microsoft’s business strategy of regularly adding new features to Windows to help sell upgrades.

The Redmond, Wash.-based software giant argues such “bundling” benefits consumers. But rivals call it unfair competition, given that Windows runs 90 percent of personal computers worldwide.

The Commission said it was “concerned” that such bundling “deters innovation and reduces consumer choice in any technologies which Microsoft could conceivably take an interest in and tie with Windows in the future.”

Under the order, Microsoft would be allowed to continue selling a version of Windows with its Media Player software installed, but it must refrain from “any commercial, technological or contractual terms” that would make the stripped-down version of Windows “less attractive or performing.”

Fearing that attempts to set prices would be overturned in court, the Commission did not order Microsoft to make the stripped-down version available at a discount. But it said Microsoft could not offer personal computer manufacturers a discount for buying the version of Windows with Media Player.

Money from the fine would be redistributed to the EU member states.

[Showtime]

Am I the only one who has a problem with Europeans fining MS?

And look where all that money will go to...

-jel:halo:

[cheapie]

the eu is fining the ms entity in europe for actions committed in europe. whether or not this fine will make it past appeals is an entirely different matter.

[gear02]

they just have problems with microsoft because it's an American company. They wouldn't care if it was a French company or something.

[bachviet]

I think M$ is going to try and settle instead of paying this big fine. It did the same thing with the US antitrust lawsuits.

[Bires]

Originally posted by the jello is jigglin
Am I the only one who has a problem with Europeans fining MS?

And look where all that money will go to...

-jel:halo:

No. Bothers me too.

Maybe when the next version of Windows becomes the standard, MS will tell them to stick it! or increase the price of the European version to cover the fine. :rolleyes:

[Tommy Boomfiger]

Originally posted by Bires


No. Bothers me too.

Maybe when the next version of Windows becomes the standard, MS will tell them to stick it! or increase the price of the European version to cover the fine. :rolleyes: i dont think they can increase the price of windows in europe. one of the issues is the high price and bundled applications. also, if they raise the price too much, people might start going elsewhere. while this is bad enough for MS, its even worse when you think of the other software sales they could lose, most importantly MS Office.

[Bires]

Originally posted by Tommy Boomfiger
also, if they raise the price too much, people might start going elsewhere.

So it's *NOT* a monopoly? Hmm... (Feds) :hmm:

[kimchicowboy]

how exactly did they come to the 497.2million euros? is it a significant number or anything?

[Showtime]

Originally posted by kimchicowboy
how exactly did they come to the 497.2million euros? is it a significant number or anything?

Europeans don't have to justify their punishments, just the USA. I think all hate mail to them should be written in German to remind those fn losers that we are the only reason german is not their adopted nat'l language,

-jel:halo:

[Tommy Boomfiger]

Originally posted by Bires


So it's *NOT* a monopoly? Hmm... (Feds) :hmm: i wouldnt say the competition is dead yet. linux is just starting to fight. the biggest market for pc software is the business market. and if companies start using linux for desktops and servers, its can hurt ms a lot. its a different type of fight that is totally different than what we are used to seeing in the business world

[Jeffbx]

Originally posted by chosenfool
i for one like the ruling.

To MS: just make a damn stable OS to begin with, that has very few security holes. sure theres always a patch for it, but cmon! if you made a product thats solid to begin with you wont have the trouble of making millions of users go to your website to update the OS. thats just very inconvenient, especially for the less-savvy computer user.

Yes, but NO ONE can provide such an OS. It's unrealistic to think so. Let's say for the sake of argument that Microsoft went broke after this ruling & everyone switched to Linux (or OSX). All the morons exploiting the MS security holes will simply switch their efforts to whatever the new prevailing OS is & cause the same problems. When you have millions of users 'field testing' your app & thousands actively looking to exploit it, there WILL be security problems.

The only reason that we see a majority of security problems in Windows is because that's the most common OS. Other OSs are not any more or less secure, there are just fewer people trying to exploit them (for now).

[Tommy Boomfiger]

Originally posted by Jeffbx
The only reason that we see a majority of security problems in Windows is because that's the most common OS. Other OSs are not any more or less secure, there are just fewer people trying to exploit them (for now). maybe, maybe not. some other OSs (like linux and osx) dont usually allow access to the core of the system to just any application, unlike windows which allows practically any application to make changes to the core.

obviously windows is a lot easier than other systems. if linux was more popular, there are going to be people who run everything in root, which would take away much of that built in security. also with open source software, just as there are more hackers with that can look for exploits, there are more people looking for solutions for those exploits. is that better? you cant really tell unless other OSs gain acceptance.

[Sesshomaru]

Wait, so how did this become the Europeans against the US? Microsoft has been known to put the beat-down on EVERYBODY, and if that didn't have some truth to it, then the 20+ states AND the US Federal gov't wouldn't have sued them for the same reason. Are you guys saying the US gov't only sued Microsoft because it had a problem with Americans?

[Bires]

Originally posted by Sesshomaru
Are you guys saying the US gov't only sued Microsoft because it had a problem with Americans?

Yep. It's clear the US gov'T has a problem with Americans. Dirty Americans, with their paying taxes and voting...makes the gov'T sick!

---what were we talking about?

[Showtime]

:stupid:

Eggzzacctly!

-jel;)

[Maarchk]

Where is the question about hardware? Seems more like a software thing.. :shrug:
Hmm and i dont think the fine is very justified, but i hope it wakes microsoft up to being more fair with its "little products" I dont think too many companies are ready to go head to head with windows, even though linux and unix are fighting little battles. Rather, think samll companies that develop media players and other secondary software would have more of a chance now that WMP will be the automatic install. And people are more willing to give a chance to a new media player versus a whole new operating system.
Sometimes you gotta fight the battles you can win.

[Showtime]

Originally posted by Maarchk
Where is the question about hardware? Seems more like a software thing.. :shrug:


We are rebels in the HW forums. :shrug:

-jel:halo:

[tupacboy]

would microsoft even notice the fine? financially i mean..

[Burzhui]

Originally posted by the jello is jigglin


....we are the only reason german is not their adopted nat'l language,

-jel:halo:



want to take that back? :mad:

[Showtime]

Nope.

-jel:halo:

[Bires]

Originally posted by Burzhui
want to take that back? :mad:
NEIN! :pfft:

[bachviet]

Originally posted by tupacboy
would microsoft even notice the fine? financially i mean..
I don't think so but M$ doesn't like to release the Windows code.

[InfiniteNothing]

Originally posted by Jeffbx


Yes, but NO ONE can provide such an OS. It's unrealistic to think so. Let's say for the sake of argument that Microsoft went broke after this ruling & everyone switched to Linux (or OSX). All the morons exploiting the MS security holes will simply switch their efforts to whatever the new prevailing OS is & cause the same problems. When you have millions of users 'field testing' your app & thousands actively looking to exploit it, there WILL be security problems.

The only reason that we see a majority of security problems in Windows is because that's the most common OS. Other OSs are not any more or less secure, there are just fewer people trying to exploit them (for now).

You're just guessing. All OSes have the benifit of the doubt unless you can provide evidence to the contrary.

[Bires]

Originally posted by InfiniteNothing
You're just guessing. All OSes have the benifit of the doubt unless you can provide evidence to the contrary.

What is THAT supposed to mean? I have never used a totally stable and intuitive OS; Sun, Apple OS, MS, even Silicon Graphics machines-all of them had *something* that didn't run quite right.

[InfiniteNothing]

He was talking about net security holes not crashes or intuition.

On another note, I have yet to crash this computer. If a mac running 10.3 crashes, it's a hardware error. Maybe AOL can do it. I haven't installed it yet but I've heard it's evilness knows no bounds. As far as intuition goes I tend to notice that what you're used to is intuitive. I used to use OS 9 all the time and I thought it was very intuitive but I went back to it (school) and it was a bit awkward.

[Jeffbx]

Originally posted by InfiniteNothing


You're just guessing. All OSes have the benifit of the doubt unless you can provide evidence to the contrary.

I think you have that backwards - I always assume an OS is INsecure unless it can be proved otherwise. So far, short of unplugging all of the data connections to the outside world, there is no way of making an OS completely secure (i.e., totally unhackable).