RSSMicrosoft Accepts Most EU Demands
By David Worthington | Published April 4, 2005, 7:27 PM
Monday, Microsoft sent a letter to European Union regulators accepting most of the Commission's demands to satisfy antitrust concerns, but asked for further dialog some matters regarding the licensing of its source code. Microsoft has accepted 20 out of the EU's 26 demands and says that it will work as quickly as possible to settle the remaining six.
Microsoft must comply with a 497 million euro judgment made against it nearly one year ago after the European Commission found that it had abused its position in the market to stifle competition. The penalty determined by the EU was for Microsoft to remove Windows Media Player from Windows XP, to allow competitors access to server source code and to provide better interoperability between platforms.
After haggling with the EU over the name of the WMP-free version of Windows XP and being threatened with fines for not cooperating to the EU's expectations, Microsoft announced last week that the product name will be Windows XP "N."
Other concessions have been to expand the evaluation period for licenses -- based upon the US MCPP license -- to allow up to eight days over the course over ten business days and to lower evaluation fees. If parties take a license, those fees are credited to their account.
The remaining stumbling block to full compliance is source code licensing.
Namely, Microsoft has sought to charge for source code access and give developers limited access with customized licenses. Last month, the EU balked at the proposed fees, claiming that they were too expensive, and once again raised the specter of fines. EU regulators also voiced concerns that Microsoft was locking open source projects out of the licensing program.
In response, a Microsoft spokesperson told BetaNews, "The Commission contends that open source vendors are excluded. This is an area that warrants further discussion with the Commission. This is an example of an issue that is nuanced and complex and these issues revolve around finding a way to strike a balance on protecting IP rights and making these technologies more broadly available."
"We are working with the Commission to try to find a way that companies can implement these technologies in code that would get distributed with open source products, but the source code wouldn't be published itself so that the confidentiality of our information is preserved," the spokesperson added.
In response, EU spokesperson Jonathan Todd told BetaNews, "The Commission is still analysing the Microsoft letter and has not reached any conclusions yet. For the moment, the Commission has not agreed to anything that Microsoft has proposed."
document ALL of the developer API's and Windows desktop, server, and application features protocols and formats in all versions of Windows and include functional example code for FREE to ALL. Limit access to source code by providing FREE or REALLY CHEAP high quality support to persons developing competing products and actually help them develop competing products.
I know it sounds sort of crappy, and it really is but well they were found guilty of breaking multiple laws so it's really only fair that they make good by helping rebuild competition.
Score: 0
|Wow, it's fewt. Ideally, that would probably be a great approach. But Microsoft is mostly concerned about their IP here not competitors. If they give source code out to people who sign contracts and compile it into apps, it's not a big risk. But open source projects are likely governed under a license that forces them to distribute the source Microsoft provides, which poses a problem.
Microsoft's solution is just lock out such projects, but obviously the EU isn't too pleased with that approach.
Score: 0
|I really don't think they should have to give out their source code. I understand that they would be concerned about losing their property, and they have every right to be worried about it. A variation of the method I described above would help, it would provide the EU with what they want and Microsoft wouldn't risk their IP.
Yes, it's me. ;-)
Score: 0
|Except that well, you tell me anywhere where they have really stifled competition? OS/2 would have been one, had IBM not been stupid.
However, the EU just wanted free money. Personally, if I were MS, I'd have pulled all the licenses from every EU country, then started suing everyone who was still using an MS platform. Since the EU likes making money through litigation, why shouldn't MS.
Score: 0
|why should they give out their code and charge for support? Does a government have the right to tell companies how they should run their business? Source code is IP, they are not going to give it out for free.
Score: 0
|I said "Limit access to source code" not give out source code. I don't think they should give it out, and this is a perfectly acceptable method to avoid having to. They ramp up some staff members that all they do is help competition develop code that works with their software and problem solved. ;-)
Score: 0
|"EU just wanted free money"
That or Microsoft broke the law, which they HAVE been found guilty of on multiple occasions.
Score: 0
|ahhhh good old OS/2.. the OS bill gates helped develop, and then *gasp* somehow some of the source code for os/2 was found in windows. Too bad IBM is such a pansy with lawsuit filing..
OS/2, what windows should have been, virus proof (yes, it is IMPOSSIBLE to get a virus to stay running in os/2), a real method to installing new hardware (polling the hardware itself and instantyly matching the hardware to the right drivers rather than trying every one of millions of drivers on each piece of hardware (the ms way)), file system that is impossible to fragment, in later versions, journaled file system (for those who dont know what that means, it means that you can have as many drives as you like with a directory called flimflamman and it all shows as one directory thanks to disk spanning, in addition to the logging so no data is ever lost), the speed and security of linux with the ease of use of windows, the first and only operating system to successfully integrate voice type dictation and navigation into the operating system itself, plus much more..
ahhh OS/2, I will miss you, R.I.P.
Score: 0
|If my understanding of this current event is correct, then the above statement is wrong.
The base of the suit is being led by samba, all they want is access at a reasonable fee if necessary tpo sertain aspects of the protocols not the source code (although the source code may be necessary to properly get samba to interact with ms's networking). samba - IF IT GOT THE SOURCE CODE for this would never have to release the code as it isnt integrated into samba, it just allows them to write a freeware app that flawlessly can access ms's proprietary protocols.
Score: 0
|