By silicon.com, 25 March 2004 17:50
The US has taken umbrage at the EC imposing penalties on Microsoft - adopting a protectionist attitude towards the treatment of the software giant.
Because the case involved a US company, US complainants and US intellectual property it is claimed that Europe had no right to intervene - despite the fact Microsoft products are sold widely throughout the EC's jurisdiction.
A letter signed by US senators from both sides of the house claimed: "This case involves a US company, that the complaining parties in the EU were primarily US companies and that all of the relevant design decisions occurred in the United States."
As such, they say the EC should have kept its hands off - 'Microsoft may be a convicted monopolist, but they're our convicted monopolist' would appear to be the message coming out of the US.
To which the EC might be tempted to respond - should this descend into a war of words (and we dearly hope it does) - that 'perhaps if you'd taken appropriate globally-applied measures against Microsoft in the first place then this wouldn't have been necessary'.
The arrogance inherent in a statement such as "it is imperative that we maintain America's competitiveness" really does suggest America believes the rest of the world owes it a living. Obviously that's based on the comments of these senators but their heavy-handed nationalism does little to improve already critical international relations.
The EC has every right to govern the competitive compliance of any company which wishes to sell products across the EU.
The US would be the first to take preventative action against European companies which sold into the US and infringed its laws and this posturing smacks of the growing trend towards an increasingly insular and isolationist United States which expects everything on its doorstep to be closely guarded but still expects the rest of the world to comply with its wishes as well.
Such a stance will re-open old wounds, such as those exposed by last year's US vs Europe patent row which erupted around the issue of mobile phone roll-outs in Iraq.
In short, the US has to accept that globalisation is not a one way street and law-making in such matters not the sole preserve of Washington. The wants and wishes of Microsoft in election year may open all sorts of doors in DC, but such powers, thankfully, still carry little sway in Europe.
Comments
There are 20 comments. Join the discussion
1. Tim Pizey
A global economy requires a global legislature,
multi-national companies currently run rings around national governments and there is
no control over the petty nationalism of
nation states.
It is imperative that we have a global government which can control the US
(and France, Israel, North Korea, China etc)
2. anonymous
The problem is that Europe is still locked in its old self - trying to be the "old giant" but still a toothless bull dog. Where are the once mighty European industries - electronics, automobiles, textile you name them, they have all been swept into oblivion due to lack of research funding, crumbling higher institutions and low salaries of experts. These are the problems facing the EU today and need immediate solutions. Even if you remove Microsoft from the IT landscape today, no European company (not even UNIX clone "Linux")will ascend to its throne. Another US giant will emerge and the trend will continue because we europeans are laggards.
3. anonymous
The problem is that Europe is still locked in its old self - trying to be the "old giant" but still a toothless bull dog. Where are the once mighty European industries - electronics, automobiles, textile you name them, they have all been swept into oblivion due to lack of research funding, crumbling higher institutions and low salaries of experts. These are the problems facing the EU today and need immediate solutions. Even if you remove Microsoft from the IT landscape today, no European company (not even UNIX clone "Linux")will ascend to its throne. Another US giant will emerge and the trend will continue because we europeans are laggards.
4. Smithy
The EU does what its always done: Works its ass off to hold down very sccessful American companies so that third rate European companies can kick them.
You only have to look at the history of Airbus.
The EU is easly the most protectionist body on the planet by far( just look at those massive agricultural subsidies), that will explain why the EU has close to ZERO growth rates and unemployment rates nearly double what we have in the US, and this in spite of the fact that America takes in far more immigrants than the rest of the world combined.
Luckily we in America don't recognise European laws, so your "sanctions " against Microsft will only apply in moribound, corrupt Europe.
Here in America, Microsoft will be free to sell Windows FULLY LOADED with Windows Media Player.
And America is by far the most powerful economy on the planet, with some 11 trillio dollars in GDP, trumping a combined Euro GDP of just $9 trillion.
5. Tony Cook
If the EU really wants to put a hurting on MS (and the US) it could do so simply by revoking MS business licenses and ban the importation and sale of MS Windows products in all EU countries. This would likely have the beneficial side effect, for the EU, of spurning renewed growth and interest in its own IT and related high-tech industries.
Unfortunately, this could also likely lead to more than a "bitter war of words" -- a "Corporate World War", so to speak -- since MS would likely use its significant lobbying (and campaign contributions) muscle to create similar action in the US. The only things that might impede escalation of this are the facts that the US is still suffering ("recovering") from the immense IT collapse and ensuing economic damage the Bush Administration brought with it (a "karmic backlash" for its unwarranted "pardoning" of MS in the DOJ fiasco??), and that despite the US' strong tech and manufacturing industrializations, the majority of its products are assembled from parts made outside the US!
"Interesting times" -- as the Chinese curse -- would seem to be upon us all.
6. anonymous
That's why I've turned against globalization. Not to mention socialists, liberals, eurocrats...
7. David de Vere Webb
The great thing about Microsoft is their focus on achievement. That and their talents set them apart. Those who take legal action against them are jealous and unjust losers. Those who criticise them have a focus on inactive commentary. No country, not even the mighty USA and least of all the entirely corrupt and stupid European Union, should try to tell Bill what he can and cannot bundle. Such actions hinder progress.
8. Paraic O'Raghallaigh
It is primarily a matter of checks and balances. A company has responsibility only to itself and its shareholders, Goverments and regions have a responsibility to everyone with a stake in society, including small innovators who must be allowed to benefit by their own creations. Microsoft have the right to innovate by purchase and market muscle but must also abide by the rules of the markets they sell into.
9. anonymous
Y A W N!!! So off goes the US again - "We're the best - you owe us a living..." Like the rest of the world - I'm fed up with their attitude. I'm ENGLISH and proud of it. In the M$ case, I agree that if they'd had the guts to sort out thier own internal affairs with a convicted monopolist this wouldn't have happened. The EU is only doing what the US Gov't couldn't. Too much $ involved? (I'm not pro-EU, by the way!)
10. anonymous
global enterprises must learn to respect regional variations until a global policy is devised
11. anonymous
Without "Microsoft Software" PC's would not be a part of the present technical innovation that has taken place. I am a 100% committed microsoft user & feel that intellectual knowledge should be protected globally.I am of the opinion that the EU ruling would not stand up in the Court of Human Rights.
"History is the version of past events that people have decided
to agree upon."
-Napoleon
12. Bob Robinson
Protectionism will not encourage competitive behavior. Competition will. We need a realistic alternative to MS. Perhaps if European Linux houses such as Mandrake would focus on packaging a finished desktop product that IT managers would be happy to put on their CEO's PC then we would see less bickering and more inovation and quality control.
13. anonymous
I can only agree with the comment on the EU farm policy, I have to reject everything else.
Saying the US does not recognise EU law is silly, it does not have to.
US *companies* trading within the EU *do*, just as EU ones in the US. MS here has been found wanting by the EU in terms of EU law, so they can either comply, pull out, or negotiate. Even if MS were to pull out of the EU (gazillion to 1 odds) there would still be US companies like Apple, SUN still able to trade with broadly comparable equipment.
The US is not the best, or worst place in the world, just different, as is the EU. Recognise that.
14. Graham
Are the US still (illegally!) blocking EU imports of, well, just about anything?
'nuff said?
15. anonymous
It shouldn't be the EU Commission but EU Court that makes such decisions.
The company concerned should not be MS in US but its EU operating co's. MS in US is outside EU. Any company trading in EU is subject to EU rules and if it breaks them wherever it is based it has to face the penalty.
16. Robert Privett
Of course the USA is not going to do anything to MS as most of their senate is supported by MS or have vested interests in MS companies
17. Rick Kline
It seems allot of the previous comments have missed the point. Windows is a operateing system, it's function is to interact with the hardware of the computer. A program/application is installed into a operateing system. Everytime I install WinXP I spend an hour removeing and reg hacking to get rid of MSN. I like the opera browser, I don't like a little pop up box telling me that IE is not my prefered browser, then asking me if I want to change it. It seems to me fredom is about being able to make your own choices. Americans want there cake and the ability to eat it as well, Freedom and Democracy echo throughout the United States until some other country or company try to excercise the rights of Freedom and Choice.
18. David J. Howe
Breaking the law is breaking the law regardless of where you are from...
19. F Saban
Consider the following analogy --
Knowing what the speed limit is in your home country. If you went to another country and got fined/ticketed for disobeying the local speed limit in favour of the one in your home country. Would you be liable to pay the fine? Of course you would need to pay the fine! Similarly, it makes sense for MS to comply with EU law when "trading" in the EU. If MS have violated any EU laws, then they should be held accountable.
Now - substitute "country" with "suburb"/"town" in the analogy above, and you get to understand that this has nothing to do with the US vs the EU and should not be made out to be the case. If you do believe that this is the EU fighting the US, then you're exactly where MS would like you to be. And that's what MS would like to make Washington believe - it's just another fantastic marketing exercise - probably a new line item in their marketing budget.
I can guess how MS would defend against my point of view. They'd say something like - "Your analogy is wrong. In your analogy, we ought to be the guys providing the car with an accelerator pedal and the EU wants us to take it out because there are some manufacturers of accelerator pedals who don't like us including our own."
20. anonymous
"American is American does."
During the course of history, many nations have attempted to rule the world in one way or another.
In the Western Europe; the Romans, the English, the French, the Hapsburgs and the last but not least; the Germans.
Now it’s the Americans. And we've all been an American.