Microsoft says EC inventing law

[gmac]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/microsoft/Story/...1201559,00.html

 

It accuses the EC of making new law and warns that the decision could harm the European and world economies.

 

"In the absence of the application of any novel concept of competition law - and in view of the fact that the software industry is not exempt from the application of competition law - Microsoft should have been aware of the fact that it was infringing the competition rules of both the treaty [of Rome] and and the EEA [European economic area] agreement."

 

The commission said Microsoft had not submitted "adequate evidence" that tying the Media Player to Windows could be justified by pro-competition benefits.

 

Those benefits could be achieved without any such tying, according to the commission's judgment.

 

"As regards 'other benefits' identified by Microsoft, they primarily relate to Microsoft's own profitability."

 

I reckon microsoft will try and play the anti american card on this. Never mind the real issue let's talk about something else. Just for the record the EC competition commission clobbers european companies with equal enthusiasm. Volkswagon being the most recent. Then again conti is italian so maybe he's sticking it to the germans

[Sarissi]

Doesn't the EU realize that Billy Gates is the Absolute Ruler of The Earth?? (thinking from the MSFT position)

 

Microsoft can be SO clueless.

[Ixthusdan]

What amazes me is that they are even saying anything. Generally, they just agree with everyone and do what they want, which is to monopolize the entire tech industry.

[linux_learner]

isnt M$'s reaction a bit juvinile? isnt a bit like a bully getttting a fraction of what he deserves and complaining saying "its not fair!"?

 

yet the media generally portray M$ as a leader, as being a fatherly image to new software companies. is something wrong here?

 

when did the courts even consider public opinion? better yet, why should they consider public opinion? the US courts seem to focus more on public opinion than the law. the EU courts at least aproximate upholding the law.

 

the US court said for M$ to divest. did M$ divest? while the US court ruling was weak, enforcing it has been pathetic. no wonder M$ is whining about the EU court. especially when considering even the US DoJ tried to do what? threaten the EU courts. oh wait, that wasnt a threat, that was a "strong warning".

 

how dare the US "police" other countries, when the US cant even police themselves. who made the US the world police? the US as of late is investigating the UN for fraud. yet M$ walks all over the US courts. thumbing their noses at the governments.

 

have any of you actually read the windows EULA? here it is http://proprietary.clendons.co.nz/licenses...xphome-eula.htm

 

what gets me is this

7. U.S. GOVERNMENT LICENSE RIGHTS.  All SOFTWARE PRODUCT provided to the U.S. Government pursuant to solicitations issued on or after December 1, 1995 is provided with the commercial rights and restrictions described elsewhere herein.  All SOFTWARE provided to the U.S. Government pursuant to solicitations issued prior to December 1, 1995 is provided with RESTRICTED RIGHTS as provided for in FAR, 48 CFR 52.227-14 (JUNE 1987) or FAR, 48 CFR 252.227-7013 (OCT 1988), as applicable.

 

since when did companies ever tell a government/s what rights the government/s had?

[johnnyv]

Suggesting a governing body is making laws!

Unheard of! ;)

[linux_learner]

Suggesting a governing body is making laws!

Unheard of! ;)

i do understand that thats what voting is for, but what we have seen lately in courts has not been the result of the voters. the legislator have to create the law, and sometime it goes before the voters. if not before the voters, then the senate must agree by 2/3 majority. lately we have been seeing courts doing their own thing, and M$ is a fine example of the courts bending to those who have the power and the $$$$$$$$$$$$$$.

 

even worse when the court does rule, its rarely upheld.