Microsoft faces $600m fine

Quaking in boots, probably not an issue...

By Ina Fried, 23 March 2004 09:50

NEWS European regulators plan to levy a record fine of more than $600m against Microsoft as part of what is expected to be a strongly worded rebuke of the company's business practices.

The ruling, which is set to be announced on Wednesday, is expected to include a fine approaching $617m (£335m), according to a source. In addition, the commission is expected to endorse its preliminary finding that Microsoft abused its monopoly power and to order the company to offer a version of Windows without Windows Media Player. Microsoft would also be required to make it easier for rivals to interact with its server software.

The European Commission could have fined Microsoft up to 10 per cent of its annual revenue, or more than $3bn. Even the proposed fine, which is said to be $613m, would be a record penalty for European regulators.

Microsoft, which sought to settle the case, said it feels a fine of that magnitude is unwarranted.

A Microsoft spokesman said: "Microsoft and the commission worked very hard and in good faith to try and resolve the very complex legal issues around this case. It's hard to see how a fine of this magnitude could be warranted under these circumstances."

Ahead of the ruling, Microsoft indicated that it is likely to appeal the commission's decision. The company would first seek a stay of any penalties from the European Court of First Instance and could eventually appeal to the European Court of Justice.

"Obviously we do not agree with the commission in several key areas," said the spokesman. "It's very likely we will seek review by the courts." Any appeal would also seek a reduction or elimination of the fine.

Even if the appeals were rejected, Microsoft would have no problem paying a fine. The company held $52.8bn in cash and short-term investments as of 31 December.

Matt Rosoff, Directions on Microsoft analyst, said: "It's a dent in quarterly earnings. It's not going to significantly affect Microsoft's future business."

The fine, Rosoff noted, is less than the $750m that Microsoft agreed to pay AOL Time Warner last year to settle that company's private antitrust suit.

The real issue, Rosoff said, is whether European regulators should be able to affect Microsoft's future ability to add features into Windows.

Microsoft has indicated it may have agreed to settle the current issues raised by the EU, but was not prepared to agree to similar limits in the future.

"I think the problem here is the EU is determined to restrict Microsoft's future behaviour. They want to say what Microsoft can and cannot do when it comes to bundling future features," Rosoff said. "Microsoft's core belief is that they are the only one with a right to determine what goes in Windows."

Ina Fried writes for News.com

Comments

There are 16 comments. Join the discussion

  1. 1. anonymous

    Erm... I own a Rover, Should They be forced by the EC to add fitting's, wiring etc. to allow me to fit a Ford Airbag?
    Or do I miss the point here?

  2. 2. Antony Norris

    You don't see Apple being hauled up in court for bundling Quicktime with it's operating system and all the other software it includes! I've just had to help someone download Java as MS aren't allowed to bundle MS Java with IE anymore, what a needless pain!

    I produce multimedia CD-ROMs which I can usually guarantee what is on the end of the computer (ie. Windows Media Player), very likely from now on people will have to do a separate install to use certain CDs. Which all adds up to unecessary user intervention and trouble.

    I'm sure this will benefit other companies who can upsell all their advert ridden software, but to the end user it just creates confusion and wasted time.

  3. 3. Sam McInerney

    What a ridiculous outcome, I truly feel sorry for microsoft. What an injustice, provide a quality product and thrive for ease of use, and you get slammed for making something convenient.

  4. 4. David de Vere Webb

    The EU are a pack of deliberate thieves. Microsoft has done no wrong and should now refuse to supply their brilliant and appropriate software to Europe. That would save Europe billions, but only in the short term.

  5. 5. Charles Lancaster

    So I suppose it will be in the consumers interest to remove:-

    Personal Firewall
    Network Stack
    Graphical user interface
    Memory Manager
    Disk defragger
    Browser
    Accessibility tools
    Remote Control
    etc

    on the basis that other software suppliers have similar products?

  6. 6. tad

    EU is taking billions in WAT and TAXES a day it is not a naff,do something better EU.

  7. 7. Don Lawrence

    I agree with other comments made here. if you want to install other players it is easy, you are not tied down Media Player. And let us not forget that Bill can always say goodbye and leave the millions of office, government, education users without Windows! Next O/S for the masses please, err, is there one?

  8. 8. anonymous

    Rover owner... yes i believe you are....

    Ford aren't likely to significantly suffer business wise from the fact you can't fit one of their airbags in your Rover....

  9. 9. anonymous

    Nice to see the second biggest crooks being taken by the biggest crooks in the universe -

  10. 10. Simon

    Many do seem to be missing the point.

    No, it wouldn't be appropriate for Rover to be forced to allow you to fit a Ford airbag in your car - neither have a commaning market position where they can exclude each other.

    Similarly with Apple, with only 5% market share they can hardly be accused of having a stranglehold !

    But with Microsoft, this is just the latest in a whole string of examples where they have used their near monopoly to deliberately make life difficult for competition. Is it reasonable, for example, to not only bundle <item x> but also to prohibit your dealers from also installing a competitive product from another supplier ? Where item x could be an internet browser, multimedia player, disk compression, or any of a whole list of things.

    Lets look at how MS saw off DR-DOS and OS/2 - they made it a condition of selling OEM MS product that you had to buy and install it on EVERY PC you built, so the customer had to buy Windows even if they wanted to use OS/2.

    With Internet Explorer they did nearly the same thing, they prohibited the dealer from removing IE or installing another product (eg Netscape).

    Many who have commented here say that there is nothing to stop them installing another product (such as Real PLayer), but for a majority of users, they don't know that there is a competing product and MS has in the past prohibited the dealer from encouraging them to look at the alternatives.

  11. 11. anonymous

    I cannot see that Media Player is such a big issue! Surely if anyone wishes to use Music Match Juke Box or any other program they are free to get it on to their system - why should Microsoft not offer a media player, just as they offer Notebook, some games and utilities with Windows. Typical of the EU, who specialise in interfering with issues that they dont understand, willnever benefit consumers, BUT will raise money for the EU.

  12. 12. Don

    Yes Simon, perhaps it's because we are in the 'trade' and we do know that there are other products out there. But Joe Public knows that if he buy's a PC with XP or such on it, then it will play his MP3's, his movies and let him browse the internet without the need for anything else. Thats what an operating package should provide and MS comes up trumps

  13. 13. anonymous

    Simon,

    I think you are missing the point here. This is not as bad as the integrated browser issue. Media Player can be "unistalled" from the UI from the Add/Remove components. Removing IE was impossible...

    However, we have just discussed in the office here the fact that unless you know what you are reasonably compentent, QuickTime and RealPlayer can "intefere" with Windows whereas Media Player will sit there and work and does not care if you have half a dozen other players installed. It doesn't constantly ask you to make it the default player for file types, etc, etc...

    It is a fact that a majority of users don't care, and if they did would probably opt for the one they can install "out of the box". Bundling or asking users to download alternative players is just going to add confusion to the whole O/S installation process - That's not just bad for Microsoft but on the consumer in general who now has to deal with all these extra installation options and issues...

    BTW, has anyone (ie the EU) actually asked the consumer whether they are concerned, upset or annoyed with the bundled player...?

  14. 14. anonymous

    If the EU want to do something useful, (very unlikely), they could persuade Microsoft to allow dealers/manufacturers to sell PC's with other OS's pre configured - try buying a laptop with Linux or QNX on board! (Oh dear, lets get out of the EU, for god's sake)

  15. 15. George Preston

    It is easy to assign metaphors to the actions against Microsoft here; like the comment about rover cars and ford airbags. In principle, this sounds unfair, but comissions such as that of monopolies are here when corporations outgrow the success and domination that rule the business world. Anybody who has downloaded the beta of Windows XP Service Pack 2 as I have will have seen *another* two companies' flagship products been simply copied in principle by Microsoft; it already happened with the last release of Office 2000 and XP - Dragon's superb NaturallySpeaking engine was simply placed into the product as a free add-in. This time, two of the most popular "plug in" or TSR programs have been targeted; Zonelabs' "zonealarm" and the simple Google Toolbar. Soon, nothing will ever be used to compliment the operating system. Companies are working to promote their software for the good of the consumer, not simply for profits, and Microsoft abuses its power as a conglomerate to drive their efforts into the ground.

  16. 16. John

    Most ordinary folks don't have the wit to install widget x from a.n.other supplier, 'cos when I doesn't work they're stuffed!

    MS may have a commanding market position but that's because we went through the nightmare of 100's of mini/mainframe suppliers each with their own esoteric o/s that cost £MMMM's and required armies to operate.

    Bill & Co have brought ICT down to the 50 quid level and we're still not content! We seem to have lost sight of where we came from - CAD packages costing £100K running (badly) on Mini Computers costing £0.5M.

    Think of the benefits that a single uniform (PC) platform has delivered... We can all read/share attachments without having to configure 'n' different viewers on our machines.

    Windoze has its faults but its a heck of an improvement over where we came from.

Post your comment

In order to post a comment you need to be registered and logged in.

Log in or create your silicon.com account below

Will not be displayed with your comment

By signing up for this service, you indicate that you agree to our Terms and Conditions and have read and understood our Privacy Policy.

Questions about membership? Find the answers in the Membership FAQ