decoration decoration
Stories

GROKLAW
When you want to know more...
decoration
For layout only
Home
Archives
Site Map
Search
About Groklaw
Awards
Legal Research
Timelines
ApplevSamsung
ApplevSamsung p.2
ArchiveExplorer
Autozone
Bilski
Cases
Cast: Lawyers
Comes v. MS
Contracts/Documents
Courts
DRM
Gordon v MS
GPL
Grokdoc
HTML How To
IPI v RH
IV v. Google
Legal Docs
Lodsys
MS Litigations
MSvB&N
News Picks
Novell v. MS
Novell-MS Deal
ODF/OOXML
OOXML Appeals
OraclevGoogle
Patents
ProjectMonterey
Psystar
Quote Database
Red Hat v SCO
Salus Book
SCEA v Hotz
SCO Appeals
SCO Bankruptcy
SCO Financials
SCO Overview
SCO v IBM
SCO v Novell
SCO:Soup2Nuts
SCOsource
Sean Daly
Software Patents
Switch to Linux
Transcripts
Unix Books

Gear

Groklaw Gear

Click here to send an email to the editor of this weblog.


You won't find me on Facebook


Donate

Donate Paypal


No Legal Advice

The information on Groklaw is not intended to constitute legal advice. While Mark is a lawyer and he has asked other lawyers and law students to contribute articles, all of these articles are offered to help educate, not to provide specific legal advice. They are not your lawyers.

Here's Groklaw's comments policy.


What's New

STORIES
No new stories

COMMENTS last 48 hrs
No new comments


Sponsors

Hosting:
hosted by ibiblio

On servers donated to ibiblio by AMD.

Webmaster
MS Gets Whupped - No Delay on EU Sanctions
Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 06:04 PM EST

Microsoft has lost its attempt to delay European Commission sanctions [PDF, 302 pps.] ordered by the EU's Court of First Instance. Here's the order [click on the top link]. The press release from The Court of First Instance is available as a PDF from this page. The court rejected Microsoft's application "in its entirety." The company hasn't decided yet whether to appeal to the higher European Court of Justice. Yesterday it said it probably would not.

"We need to focus on doing an excellent job with complying with today's decision," Microsoft general counsel Brad Smith said in a conference call with reporters. That includes sharing technical information so other software and hardware manufacturers can develop products that work with Microsoft's Windows.

Microsoft immediately announced that it will create a website later today to begin processing requests for the interoperability information. It will unbundle Media Player by January, it says.

Microsoft has now twice been convicted of abusing its monopoly, once in the US and now in Europe, and let's all keep that clearly in mind when they tell us and show us that they would like to set up a software patent club. And I wish to thank the SAMBA team, FSF Europe for carrying the legal burden necessary to make this happen, and RealNetworks for *not* dropping out of the EU antitrust process. This is a victory for them.

Here's the FSF-Europe Microsoft EU litigation page, where you can find links to documents they submitted along with the SAMBA team to the EC and their motion to intervene before the EU. The page also contains a nice explanation why the EC decision is not a perfect outcome for F/OSS.

Speaking of thanking people, here's the FSF Europe statement on the Microsoft ruling:

"Those who value freedom and competition have received two nice Christmas gifts this week. First, new EU member Poland does not allow the introduction of innovation- and job-killer software patents through the diplomatic back-door. And now the European Court decides that Microsoft should not get another four years to further harm its competition" says Georg Greve, President of the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE).

Bo Versterdorf, President of the European Court, has today rejected Microsoft's appeal to delay execution of the sanctions. Microsoft has been forced by European Commission to publish technical information about the interfaces of their Windows operating system to enable competitors to reach interoperability between their systems and Windows.

While the software giant claimed that following the tradition of the technical industry to publish formats and standards will do irreparable harm to them judge Bo Vesterdorf agreed with European Commission and FSFE that this was not a convincing thesis.

Legal and technical competence brought in by the Samba Team and FSFE in the process helped the European Commission to resist to the attack of the most important law firms in Europe. The Free Software community, represented by lawyer Carlo Piana, kept defending european consumers and the interests of European citizens and of all companies that base their business on Free Software.

"Microsoft now will have to explain how they have arbitrarily modified public standards they use in their servers and work hard to re-establish competition in the small server market. On the other end we are sure that it is an opportunity for the market to compete on quality of code and services, respecting interoperability" says Carlo Piana.

"This is a great success of an international community that is really able to coordinate and obtain excellent results: technical, legal and political. We have always thought that Microsoft's arguments were poor and we are glad we were able to explain this to the judge so well" says Stefano Maffulli, Italian Chancellor of the FSFE.

But this success did in fact cost something: the FSFE, who played an important role in the decision, was only able to put this much resources into these cases due to the ongoing financial support from the Free Software community as well as from several companies. "The more donations we get, the more we will be able to extend our engagement for Europe's freedom from monopolisation", Stefano Maffulli concludes.

About the Free Software Foundation Europe:

The Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) is a charitable non-governmental organisation dedicated to all aspects of Free Software in Europe. Access to software determines who may participate in a digital society. Therefore the Freedoms to use, copy, modify and redistribute software - as described in the Free Software definition- allow equal participation in the information age. Creating awareness for these issues, securing Free Software politically and legally, and giving people Freedom by supporting development of Free Software are central issues of the FSFE. The FSFE was founded in 2001 as the European sister organisation of the Free Software Foundation in the United States.

Further information: http://www.fsfeurope.org

We've all seen the legal bills incurred by SCO in its various litigations, so that should give you an idea of how expensive it is to litigate. The more money donated to help fight back, the more effective FSF can be.


  


MS Gets Whupped - No Delay on EU Sanctions | 94 comments | Create New Account
Comments belong to whoever posts them. Please notify us of inappropriate comments.
OT Threads Here
Authored by: chrisbrown on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 06:49 PM EST
HTML your tags please.

<a href="http://www.example.com/">Check this out</a>

and choose "HTML Formated" post mode.

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS Gets Whupped - No Delay on EU Sanctions
Authored by: ghost on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 06:50 PM EST
This is truly good news, and well deserved for MS.

[ Reply to This | # ]

But... but...
Authored by: Rob M on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 07:09 PM EST
Everything is integrated, how can it possibly be ripped out by January?

Does this give the option of perjury charges in the US case? (yeah, like the DOJ
would ever pursue it though :-/)

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS Gets Whupped - No Delay on EU Sanctions
Authored by: senectus on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 07:11 PM EST
Got to love the way Karma is giving everyone that deserves it, a VERY MERRY
CHRISTMAS :-)

[ Reply to This | # ]

Now for the Real Issue: Standards
Authored by: maco on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 07:14 PM EST
MS web site for standards.

Will MS actually post standards that are detailed, complete and non-loaded?

How many times will Samba need to approach the EU in order to coerce MS to do
what they said they would do?

If MS actually follows through with this, I will buy Bill Gates a beer.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Joining Professional Bodies
Authored by: eamacnaghten on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 07:16 PM EST
We've all seen the legal bills incurred by SCO in its various litigations, so that should give you an idea of how expensive it is to litigate. The more money donated to help fight back, the more effective FSF can be.

I would like to add my support to that. As free software expands, and so does it's profitability, the more under attack it will become, and the more defense is neccessary.

The best way to combat this is to join a professional body like the FSF. That way these fighting funds can be centralized and more effective, and because of their existance, will deter many from "having a go" where they would have done.

If you are a student, or unemployed or simply very short of cash then there is an excuse for not joining one of these bodies. However, if you are a consultant using free software, or an ISP running Linux, or provide a web designing service on machines running free software then I would suggest it is essential to join. They do look after your interest after all, is it not a good idea to help enable them to do so?

In short - if you should join the FSF and have not, please do so.

NB: I am not affiliated to the FSF (or similar organization) in any way.

Web Sig: Eddy Currents

[ Reply to This | # ]

Patents for protocols, file formats and standards
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 07:30 PM EST
Can anyone tell me whether patents for protocols, file
formats, and standards (including Internet standards) are
covered by the EU directive on software patents or whether
they are handled separately under a different patent bill.
Microsoft has busy patenting protocols, file formats and
Internet standards and opening up these will be pointless
if patents are allowed on these things.

[ Reply to This | # ]

they finally "Get it"!
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 08:09 PM EST
This is great news! If a company claims to sell operating system software then
they shouldn't be adding features for the sole purpose of eliminating
competition. Microsoft claims to sell an operating system...well then thats
what they should be selling! Don't claim to sell an operating system when it
includes entertainment and productivity applications because thats no an
operating system! call it anything you want but don't call an all encompassing
software package an operating system.

[ Reply to This | # ]

Good News.... For Micro$oft
Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 10:34 PM EST
Micro$oft is being slowly forced to compete without bully tactics and a huge
wallet. They don't like it, but if you think they cannot do it you are living
in SCOland.

Oddly enough, I think the competition will be good for linux also.

Good Christmas all!

-- Alma

[ Reply to This | # ]

  • The tables are starting to turn. - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 11:34 PM EST
  • Remarkable - Authored by: Anonymous on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 11:42 PM EST
    • Remarkable - Authored by: Anonymous on Friday, December 24 2004 @ 01:13 AM EST
GPL will still be out
Authored by: kurt555gs on Wednesday, December 22 2004 @ 10:58 PM EST
I will be willing to bet anyone on this board my standard wager of one cold soda
pop that any interoperability will specificly exclude any GPL software.

And no one will challange them.

Cheers



---
M$ Delenda Est!
* Kurt *

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS NOT "Whupped"
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 23 2004 @ 01:58 AM EST
Microsoft may have got slightly the worse of a minor skirmish. But it may have achieved its core objective.

It's an important goal for Microsoft to eliminate effective competition in software. Part of that goal involves crippling the Free Software movement.

It will go a considerable way to achieving this goal if it is allowed to charge a "license fee" for interoperability information about its communication protocols. Communication protocols have traditionally been open and freely available to all; the Internet was built on open protocols before Microsoft even existed. Microsoft exploited the openness of the Internet to interoperate with Internet infrastructure. (It also exploited the weaknesses of some FOSS licenses, especially the BSD license, to steal code from the FOSS community - but that's a different story.) Now that it has established a monopoly, it wants to get rid of the tradition that allowed it to enter the game: it wants to close protocols by charging "license fees" for the information that is essential for interoperability. The EU decision does not preclude this. If MS gets away with this, it will have won, big-time. It is inappropriate and inaccurate to say "MS was Whupped".

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS Gets Whupped - No Delay on EU Sanctions
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 23 2004 @ 04:54 AM EST
Does anyone know what is happening in the Japan vs MS case?
Haven't heard anything about it for a while.

I want to be happy about this desision, but MS more and more seem like a trapped
rat, so it worries me as to where and how they will lash out next in their
desperate attempt to retain their monopoly.

[ Reply to This | # ]

What about system with OEM version?
Authored by: Anonymous on Thursday, December 23 2004 @ 05:38 AM EST
Does anyone know whether this ruling is intended only for separately bought,
correction licensed, versions?

What about preinstalled OEM versions?
Do computer selling shops now need to stock both WIN systems?
(Think grocery stores / discounters selling computers too, ie no opportunety to
change preinstalled system themselves)

Makes me wonder...

[ Reply to This | # ]

For systems already running....
Authored by: LocoYokel on Thursday, December 23 2004 @ 09:21 AM EST
Are they going to have to provide a method for removing media player for people
already using windows?

[ Reply to This | # ]

MS Gets Whupped - No Delay on EU Sanctions
Authored by: RizSilverthorn on Friday, December 24 2004 @ 05:45 AM EST

I have been thinking about this (my minor paranoia is showing here!)

This is actually good for MS. They have been told that they cannot charge more for this Windows XP Reduced Media Edition, but they were also not told they had to charge less. This is the part that is very good for them. They are going to charge the same price for either version. The average user will not want to pay the same money for a reduced edition that has less features than the normal edition they can also buy.

I can see what's going to happen six months from the time the new version will be available. MS are going to say that most people are wanting the original, uncrippled version, so they were right to include WMP in Windows. Then they'll probably use that to try and overturn any other rulings against them.

Maybe I need to stay away from the coffee for a while, but that was my second thought. My first was "Yay, finally someone gets enough backbone to stand up to them".

[ Reply to This | # ]

Groklaw © Copyright 2003-2013 Pamela Jones.
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners.
Comments are owned by the individual posters.

PJ's articles are licensed under a Creative Commons License. ( Details )