euro|topics - Europe rules against Microsoft

Main focus of Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Europe rules against Microsoft

On Monday, September17th, European justice confirmed the condemnation of Microsoft for abusing its dominant market position. The American computer giant is going to have to pay a half billion euro fine for refusing to respect demands stipulated in 2004 by the European Commission, after a complaint was filed in 1998. Microsoft is notably criticised for systematically integrating the Media Player software programme into Windows in order to eliminate competitors.

De Volkskrant - Netherlands

"This judgment crowns a nine year judicial struggle", considers the editorial of the daily. "The European Commission has kept a firm position on a territory where the American government allowed itself to be seduced, in its struggle against monopolies, by the software giant by signing a dodgy trade-off. ... This result is cause for jubilation as the judgement severely castigates a company that abuses its power on the market to deter its competitors. ... Consumers will not necessarily be running to find Media Player alternatives, let alone Windows alternatives. The judgement will also allow an important precedent: Microsoft will no longer be able to impose software that is impossible to withdraw, which should stimulate various competitors on the market to bring out products up to competing with Microsoft. Thus, in the long term, consumer interests have indeed been served." (18/09/2007)

Rzeczpospolita - Poland

Piotr Gabryel voices approval of the European Commission's battle against Microsoft and the European Court of Justice's ruling. "The ruling against Microsoft and above all the likelihood that the company will now refrain from its monopolistic practices as a result of this decision will lead to lower prices for computer software, and this in turn will boost economic growth within the EU... Unfortunately, the number of cases in which the state is left powerless against rapidly-growing monopolising companies is much greater both in the economic history of the world and in recent economic history. We pay the price for this every day." (18/09/2007)

Tribune de Genève - Switzerland

"The decision will go down in history", considers Pierre Ruetschi in his editorial. "But the battle has only just begun. For, in the shadow of Microsoft, another giant has been born that is even more awesome in the long run: Google, which, from a simple search engine has turned into an Internet hydra. Google has founded a new empire by combining three elements: its search engine (the tool), traffic (the client) generated by free services and advertising (revenue). The result: such a phenomenal success that it poses a threat to Microsoft. How much time will it take a court to deal with the question of the monopoly of knowledge? Even Google does not have that information." (18/09/2007)

Der Standard - Austria

In Michael Moravec's opinion, the Microsoft ruling that comes almost ten years after the proceedings began points "to the past". "Because today's reality is very different to the one the case was originally based on. Google, YouTube, Apples iTunes: back then they existed only as ideas, if that; now they command market shares of up 80 percent. The fast-moving world of the Internet is apparently moving too fast for the European Commission. It isn't in a position to say whether Vista's Media Player software breaches competition laws or whether it's fair because alternative programmes are on offer. And no one in Brussels can say whether it's fair that Apple, with its 70 percent share of the market for music content from the Internet, continues to release songs only for its own hardware. It's too soon to say, we'll have to see, seems to be the general stance. Microsoft's allegations that the European Commission's indifferent and somewhat unworldly attitude in this area means that it's failing to keep up with new developments can't be simply dismissed offhand." (18/09/2007)

Financial Times - United Kingdom

The daily advises how the Commission should now handle companies such as Microsoft. "Rather than going on a prosecutorial rampage it should try to find timely, light-touch ways to regulate the fast-moving technology business. ... What it [the case] has done is establish a clear legal basis for the Commission to regulate dominant technology companies. As the jurisdiction with the strictest rules, it will now lead the world in that role. ... It should be ready to act pre-emptively when companies seek to bundle new products with an existing monopoly. The appointment of a trustee to act as referee and ensure fair play on issues of interoperability has also been a qualified success. The principles the Commission fought on - interoperability and no extension of monopoly power into new markets - are good ones. The new legal mandate, however, will work best if fear of it means that it need not be enforced in court." (18/09/2007)

» To the complete press review of Tuesday, September 18, 2007

Bookmark this page at