IWETHEY v. 0.3.0 | TODO
1,095 registered users | 1 active user | 3 LpH | Statistics
Login | Create New User
IWETHEY Banner

Welcome to IWETHEY!

New Not quite.
[link|http://curia.europa.eu/en/actu/communiques/cp07/aff/cp070063en.pdf|Press Release from Court of First Instance] (5 page .pdf) (via [link|http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070917053717322|Groklaw]):

The first type of conduct found to constitute an abuse consisted in Microsoft\ufffds refusal to supply its competitors with \ufffdinteroperability information\ufffd and to authorise them to use that information to develop and distribute products competing with its own products on the work group server operating system market, between October 1998 and the date of adoption of the decision. By way of remedy, the Commission required Microsoft to disclose the \ufffdspecifications\ufffd of its client/server and server/server communication protocols to any undertaking wishing to develop and distribute work group server operating systems.

The second type of conduct to which the Commission took exception was the tying of Windows Media Player with the Windows PC operating system. The Commission considered that that practice affected competition on the media player market. By way of remedy, the Commission required Microsoft to offer for sale a version of Windows without Windows Media Player.

[...]

The Court therefore upholds the part of the decision concerning interoperability.

[...]

The Court therefore upholds the part of the decision concerning the bundling of Windows Media Player.

[...]

The Court therefore annuls the decision in so far as it orders Microsoft to submit a proposal for the appointment of a monitoring trustee with the power to have access, independently of the Commission, to Microsoft\ufffds assistance, information, documents, premises and employees and to the source code of the relevant Microsoft products and in so far as it provides that all the costs associated with that monitoring trustee be borne by Microsoft.

The fine

The Court finds that the Commission did not err in assessing the gravity and duration of the infringement and did not err in setting the amount of the fine. Since the abuse of a dominant position is confirmed by the Court, the amount of the fine remains unchanged at EUR 497 million.

REMINDER: An appeal, limited to points of law only, may be brought before the Court of Justice of the European Communities against a decision of the Court of First Instance, within two months of its notification.


MS is going to keep losing until they start doing what the courts order.

Cheers,
Scott.
New And the fines will keep growing
as I believe the calculation is done per day of non-compliance.
Too much of today's music is fashionable crap dressed as artistry.Adrian Belew
New And don't forget the exchange rate...
     EU Court rejects MS's appeal, upholds $613M fine. - (Another Scott) - (12)
         No... its ONLY for matters of *LAW*. - (folkert)
         Oh never mind - (bepatient) - (1)
             ;-) -NT - (Another Scott)
         Re: EU Court rejects MS's appeal, upholds $613M fine. - (andread) - (8)
             How did they get on the Windows network? - (Andrew Grygus) - (4)
                 If that is true - (andread) - (3)
                     Bozo - (crazy)
                     No, the problem is not solved. - (Andrew Grygus) - (1)
                         EGADS NetBEUI! -NT - (folkert)
             Not quite. - (Another Scott) - (2)
                 And the fines will keep growing - (bepatient) - (1)
                     And don't forget the exchange rate... -NT - (scoenye)

The LRPD wots of things you wot not of.
56 ms