Will the EU fine change Microsoft?
Summary: I think Microsoft needs to undertake some diplomacy that will put a final, definitive line under all this. But what would you do if the EU fined you?
The impact of the European Union's $1.3 billion anti-trust fine against Microsoft is still reverberating.
There's a new sheriff in town, the fine says. Her name is Kroes, Neelie Kroes. She's Dutch, and sits on the board of (among others) McDonald's Dutch affiliate.
That fine would buy a lot of Happy Meals. It might bankrupt Mayor McCheese.
Microsoft's chances of getting out of the fine appear to be slim and none. CNBC reporter Jim Goldman is unimpressed with the EU's action, saying write the check and move on.
Jim Zemlin of The Linux Foundation is also unimpressed, but aims his fire at Microsoft instead of the regulator.
For all the talk of change coming from Redmond, its terms for licensing protocols remain "incompatible with open source licensing practices," creating an appearance of openness with no hope of interoperability ever being achieved.
After losing its U.S. antitrust case, Microsoft found relief in a new U.S. Administration, but European bureaucracies are more insulated from political pressure than those here. And the one here is due to change in any case.
Given the size of the fine (which just covers its breaches of a 2004 agreement since that date) and the fact Kroes has other Microsoft cases on her docket, there are some hard questions being asked today.
- Was Microsoft's recent openness just a sign of weakness, which the EU seized upon?
- Can Microsoft continue to prosper if it has to license its protocols at the rates required by the EU?
Personally I think Microsoft needs to undertake some diplomacy that will put a final, definitive line under all this. But what would you do if the EU fined you?
Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily email newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.
Talkback
Of course not.
disinformation organization in the world. Only when the financial hurt becomes
too high and the regime is toppled by the shareholders will anything change.
The current regime is far too filled with liars, cheats and crooks. It must all be
replaced.
If anyone doubts how bad the dung mess is at MSFT, go here and download all 158
pages of blood and gore:
http://blog.seattlepi.nwsource.com/microsoft/archives/132891.asp
It is certainly an eye opener to see how the top management of MSFT knew far in
advance that Vista was going to be a mess. Its internal people made that clear.
The simple truth is that the current fines will change nothing. MSFT has to be hit
with fines in the $10-15BN range to get the attention to topple this rogue
disinformation regime wholesale.
MSFT needs a new leader who will commit himself to honesty with customers and
"partners" not a lying, cheating, sweaty scoundrel of a mongrel like Ballmer.
I agree, and wow, love the link you gave.
pitting the stock holders against the Board. I guess we'll see.
Down..
Let them crash, their share price is nothing
Then Penelope and Rupert can redivert their funds into something actually useful in the IT industry.
I think that you are being unfair to 'Fox news', as they
::Looking Around Ax, Shade, Ou and all the other Microshaft Bigots::
Cost of doing business
Declare bankruptcy.
Oh, you mean "if I were running Microsoft?"
Pay it and chalk it up to the cost of doing business. Even if Microsoft had known from the beginning that this fine would be the price of the strategy they've taken for the past several years, it would have been cheap at the price. Consider that the fine was far from a sure thing, and their strategic decision is even harder to criticize.
Not enough
They've got a whole new set of rules. They need to either stop looking for loopholes in them and start playing the game; or get off the field entirely.
Ambiguity
Sort of like payroll and taxes. The only alternatives are worse.
[i]They've got a whole new set of rules. They need to either stop looking for loopholes in them and start playing the game; or get off the field entirely.[/i]
Like any rules, they're just conditionals: "The consequence of doing this is ____." Well, one alternative is doing things the way Microsoft always has while insisting that there's nothing wrong with that, another is doing it the way the regulators tell them to, and another is to do things the way they always have while [i]promising[/i] to do things according to the law.
While Bill was CEO they did it the first way. The second worked a lot better for Steve, and this bill is coming in for that. On the other hand, if they'd done it the third way they'd have a lot less of the server business today -- and that's worth a whole lot more than 900 million Euros.
Exercise for the reader: how much would MS have to lower prices due to competition before 900 million [u]annually[/u] would be a better alternative?
Under Bill, when the US anti-trust case started
When they first started making obscene money they even tried to start their own bank.
Nothing short of pathetic megalomania.
And all they can come up with is Vista ...
Yes, even this amount is small change to Microsoft.
I don't want to see MS continue giving $$$$ to the EU, I want them to obey the law and provide the necessary protocols. Perhaps they should begin with their horrid steal-from-the-common-good-and-privatize-Kerberos-to-embrace/extend/extinguish "secret" proprietary data fields.
Microsoft has a lot of really talented programmers, but they are a disgusting and criminal company.
The numbers are not there
They are if they just keep coming.
Wish granted
The hard part is the "own a monopoly" thing. Otherwise, there are business that work this way in every American city. I don't advise trying to go into that line, though, because their "barrier to entry" is lethal.
MS has no choice but to comply.
Balmer's decision (and you can bet he had the final say) to buck the EC just cost his shareholder's company $1.3 Billion. This is inexcusable. If I were a major shareholder I would be asking for his head.
Hell, Why Become a Shareholder Before Asking for Dalth Ballmer's Head?
Promises, Promises from Microsoft. Again.
I would comply ...
I would comply foe the simple fact that the EU Competition Commission will now have a Microsoft under a microscope and any abuses competitors see fit to bring to the commission will most likely be investigated whether valid or not.
Microsoft may have the financial means to pay the fines as a cost of doing business for the moment, but in the foreseeable future it's very likely that Microsoft will be overwhelmed in a sea of investigations and legal battles unless they change their business tactics.
Everyone seems to forget that Microsoft is the first company in 50 years that had to be fined for not complying with an order issued by the EU Commission. Neelie Kroes and her successors are not going to forget this fact. :)
iron maiden
I know, because I'm Dutch myself and I have seen her operate in Dutch politics.....
The result will be positive for the world, I think. Monopolies like Microsoft has, are essentially anti-capitalistic and anti-free market. We need a well functioning free market. In short, I like Neelie! :-)
Greetz, Pjotr.
The EU/EC has the right tools for monetary gain