Microsoft cancels oral hearing in EC browser-bundling case
Summary: The first week of June was slated to be an interesting one, in terms of the current browser-bundling antitrust case in the European Union involving Microsoft, Opera and a growing cast of interested third parties. But Microsoft officials said they've canceled their request for the oral hearing slated for June 3-5.
The first week of June was slated to be an interesting one, in terms of the current browser-bundling antitrust case in the European Union involving Microsoft, Opera and a growing cast of interested third parties.
But Microsoft officials said they've canceled their request for the oral hearing slated for June 3-5. The reason for the cancellation is detailed in a May 21 blog post by Microsoft Associate Deputy General Counsel David Heiner on the Microsoft on the Issues" blog.
The short version of the explanation: Microsoft requested the hearing to be rescheduled because the company believed that a number of the potential attendees were going to attend, instead, the International Competition Network (ICN) meeting in Zurich, which is slated for those same dates, June 3 to 5. (The European Commission is the one who chose the Microsoft hearing dates, according to the Redmondians.)
Because of the overlap in the dates, Heiner blogged:
"(I)t appears that many of the most influential Commission and national competition officials with the greatest interest in our case will be in Zurich and so unable to attend our hearing in Brussels. We raised concerns about this scheduling conflict with the Commission the very same day we were notified of the proposed hearing date. We asked the Commission to consider alternative dates and expressed our serious concern that holding a hearing during the same days as the ICN would make it much more difficult for the Commission’s and Member States’ key decision makers to attend. We pointed out that there’s no legal or other reason that the hearing needs to be held the first week of June. We believe that holding the hearing at a time when key officials are out of the country would deny Microsoft our effective right to be heard and hence deny our “rights of defense” under European law.
"Unfortunately, the Commission has informed us that June 3-5 are the only dates that a suitable room is available in Brussels for a hearing. Thus, the Commission has declined to reschedule the hearing despite our offer to find and outfit a suitable room ourselves at another time."
(An aside: When the hearing date originally was announced, Microsoft officials said the company's request for an oral hearing was a formality more than a given. “To preserve right to have a hearing, need to ask by time you file your response. No decision has been made yet on whether we will actually pursue although Commission has set a date for a hearing if we pursue,” a spokesperson told me in early May.)
So what happens now? Will the European Commission issue accelerate its final ruling -- which more than a few observers are expecting will be in favor of Opera and possibly involve a hefty fine plus un-bundling remedies, based on the wording of the EC's preliminary findings in the matter -- with no further input?
If Microsoft had been successful in getting the hearing rescheduled to a later date, a delay might have helped the company (at least to a degree), given summer recess schedules for the courts. But once it became clear the EC wouldn't let the Softies reschedule, why not just go ahead and argue their case? (The New York Times has another piece of information, re: why Microsoft may have tried to seek a delay: "Any delay in the Microsoft case could have extended the outcome beyond the reach of Ms. Kroes, whose future as the Europe’s top competition official will depend on the outcome of June 7 European elections.")
(Update: EC officials, in refusing Microsoft's request for a new date, said they consider Microsoft to have withdrawn its oral hearing request. Microsoft officials said they do not agree with the EC's characterization of their date-change request as a "withdrawl." Don't you just love lawsuits?)
What's your gut? Do you think Microsoft's decision to cancel the scheduled June oral hearing may end up hurting the company more than helping it?
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Opera = Euro company
Nope
The main browser competitors are US companies. This is about competition on
Don't be such a Muppet
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6383913.stm
Lifts $1.3bn
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2519913.stm
Plasterboard $475m
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/3155384.stm
Food additives $161m
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/4968872.stm
Chemicals $491m
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/2742890/Record-fine-for-vitamin-price-fixers.html
Vitamins $750m
And there are plenty more. Nice to know that the US Government (under Bush) let you get ripped off by shyster and flywheel companies. Luckily for you the consumer, the Obama administration is looking to clean up your backyard.
It doesn't matter where they are from, it matters how they do business in the EU and if that is to collude or operate to in a manner that is deemed to be illegally anti-competitive then they can pay the consequences.
You may wish to read this from the DOJ
http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/public/speeches/235598.htm
Now stop reading the Daily Rabid Xenophobe and do some thinking for yourself.
Opera is garbage & EU/EC will take anyones Money
Socialism is not cheap so they of course will take money from anyone anywhere in the world that can afford it. You know all those dirty wealthy companies that produce products and then sell them at a profit. They are so much worst than countries that steal others money and produce nothing. When will the blood sucking stop?
EU = Biggest and Worst Monopoly.
They don't help common man. They make crybaby corporations of Europe more fat.
--Ram--
Crybaby corporations of Europe
Those that produce write checks. Those that need get checks. Need has no value and does not deserve a check. This is called stealing.
Actually...
Actually... I stand corrected
- Thanks for the correction. I have not read the information you speak of. Im sure its a good read.
EC's antitrust laws:
-If it exists - tax it
-If it moves - regulate it
-If it makes money - Fine it
;)
That's laughable
Poor sour grapes. Somebody is finally taking a stand against poor victimized predatory monopoly Microshaft. Boo hoo.
LOL... :D
Your right - That's laughable
You have 3 Choices the way I see it:
-Work hard to create a better product at a better price
-Don?t compete and loose market share
-Or steal what you can?t create on your own - (EU?s Choice)
This is not us complaining but recognizing the theft for what it is. Buy into the propaganda if you must but we over here like to work for our money not steal it.
?Poor sour grapes. Somebody is finally taking a stand against poor victimized predatory monopoly Microshaft. Boo hoo?
Poor cousin (EU) asking for another dole payment from your working uncle (USA).
Who has sour grapes?
You're laughable
No, we just oppose greedy, power-hungry monopolies run by capitalist pigs that refuse to work on a level playing field and put the almighty dollar above all else.
I'm an American, btw. Let's hope the Obama Administration and the DoJ follow suit.
[i]You have 3 Choices the way I see it:
-Work hard to create a better product at a better price[/i]
Especially when you have the playing field all to yourself. Then price-gouge and lock in the masses as a captive market so they can't escape from you.
[i]-Don?t compete and loose market share[/i]
What competition? What lost market share? When you're the only game in town, you can afford to put out mediocre, under achieving garbage like Viista.
[i]-Or steal what you can?t create on your own - (EU?s Choice)[/i]
Aww, poor baby. Tell that to Novell, Netscape, IBM and all the other victims of M$ past misdeeds.
Wrong Examples
Try to find an example of a car company being fined billions for failing to make the rear seat optional (the poor consumer has to take what comes with the car).
Modus Operandi may be different
How about the one about the software company...
Oh wait, that is Microsoft, and the EC both fined and forced them to stump up the information.
Is that a good enough example?
Or perhaps you'd prefer the car example where Ford and Firestone both screwed up on setting and getting tire options matched up with SUV's resulting in rollovers and deaths etc.
Is everyone in the EU a victim?
I have no clue how Ford making a mistake on tire usage or manufacture problems of a tire has anything to do with this argument. Frankly it?s a stretch. Nice try though!
Is everyone in the EU a victim? I hope not.
Well, at least those in the EU...
Here's a hint. The EC's rules on business have been around for a long long time, and Microsoft knew what they were going in. They chose not to play by the only rules in town. You really should not be shocked/surprised/upset at Microsoft getting hammered by the EC regulators when they aren't doing what they are required to do by EC law.
After all, you wouldn't expect to succeed in playing in the NBA if you tried to claim that they should play by some other set of rules would you?
And lest you forget, the US and other jurisdictions have also found as points of their laws that Microsoft isn't doing what is required of them. So, stop the ignorant babbling, please.
Former MS victims, yes.
Would a mouse designed especially for fat hands be progress? Probably, if that's the problem/solution which you see.
Yes of course
Justice? HA