RSSMicrosoft's browser-tying case may or may not be heard by the EC
By Scott M. Fulton, III | Published April 29, 2009, 3:44 PM
This morning, Microsoft issued its formal, sealed response to the European Commission's January Statement of Objections, which was the EC's first step toward formally charging the software maker with objectionable conduct by bundling Internet Explorer with Windows. But in a correction of press accounts early this morning, both Microsoft and the European Commission confirmed to Betanews today that the company only issued a request for a hearing before the EC in order to preserve its right to be heard at a later date, and that Microsoft has not decided whether it actually will present its case orally.
"Parties responding to a [Statement of Objections] are required to indicate by that response whether they will request a hearing or preserve their right to one," Microsoft corporate spokesperson Jack Evans told Betanews. "That doesn't mean Microsoft will ultimately press for a hearing...The company has requested a hearing to preserve its right to have one at a later date, but has not yet made that determination."
As the European Commission notes on its own Web site, companies sent a Statement of Objections (SO) are given an eight-week grace period to respond, and they may do so orally. Microsoft's grace period was extended by one week by request. But as European Commission spokesperson Jonathan Todd told Betanews this afternoon, companies can extend their right to be heard even after having issued their written response, and that's the step the company has taken.
"Companies responding to a Statement of Objections do have the right to request an oral hearing as a matter of course," stated Todd. "Some companies choose not to exercise this right. Microsoft has indicated to the Commission that it is exercising this right. No date has yet been set."
microsoft shouldn't waste any money on the issue.
it is a lost cause.
but it doesn't mean that when the o.s. begins to download and install the updates on a new installation,
one of them couldn' be the ie browser.
besides "WE ALL KNOW" that microsoft has a habit of masking their occassional "deviant ware" as "critical security updates".
Score: 1
|This is getting silly.
Why can't BetaNews bother to find out who's behind the petty voting-down of every comment that PC_Tool or Foxfyre make?
No doubt I'll be next for asking.
Score: 1
|What's BN going to do about it? It's not like it's against the ToS or anything.
*shrug*
Stupid people have the right to be stupid.
Basically, if you can't argue intelligently, just mod people you disagree with down. It's easier that way. No having to examine your own stances, defend your ideologies, or hell, even think...at all.
And... if the constant logout/login cycle keeps them busy instead of posting the equivalent of digital drool? Better for the rest of us.
We all know the mod system is broke. No-one cares. Why should BN? Besides, I was a tad insulting in that comment on this topic. I really do hope blabbery shows up. He had no end of stupid.
Hell, I find it incredibly amusing that my one post in one of Angela's earlier topics (where I merely made a comment along the lines of kittens being Evil™ wrapped in fur...and claws) got a -13. Apparently fatty's only friends in his basement abode are of the feline variety. ;-)
Score: -12
|Paul, don't worry.
It simply means that the same troll (and we know who it is) is kept busy with so many sock puppet accounts simply voting in a worthless system.
Heck, he could be out doing something of value! LOL!
But it is rather fascinating to know that the posts command so much attention and time of the one who is attempting to assert that he doesn't care - as it totally preoccupies his time.
But I do think it pretty well demonstrates that the entire voting concept is completely asinine. But hey, remember where we are! ;-)))
Score: -12
|I very rarely intrude and, as such, anyone who doesn't read BN comments on a daily basis probably won't even recognize my name.
While the intelligence of most posters cannot be denied (discounting spelling and grammar because English, contrary to some contentions, is not a universal primary language), the caliber is sometimes questionable. It may be fun for "regulars" to poke fun at each other, although I daresay this often borders on intentional incitement; however, there are some who cannot handle it, or who deal with it poorly/immaturely. I don't question the potential entertainment value, especially for the clique of characters who frequent the Comments section; but, I do question why even those I've had great discussions with have, at (many) times, initiated threads or been first-to-post with a barb meant to draw forth the trolls. Those who contribute to or continue the debasement of discussion will often reap what they sew.
@Paul They may have brought it upon themselves.
Score: 0
|"although I daresay this often borders on intentional incitement;"
You bet!
"here are some who cannot handle it, or who deal with it poorly/immaturely."
Huh...ya think?
"I don't question the potential entertainment value, especially for the clique of characters who frequent the Comments section;"
Wait...some people come here for something *other* than entertainment? Really?? Who???
"but, I do question why even those I've had great discussions with have, at (many) times, initiated threads or been first-to-post with a barb meant to draw forth the trolls."
See the first quote of yours I pasted. Sometimes, we just *know* one or two of the others are going get all frothy and get spittle all over their monitors. it may be considered a weakness, or failure of character, but I just can't resist pressing those buttons that turn them into blubbering imbeciles. No excuses, I just enjoy it.
I never asked why they do it. I know. I explained it myself (inability to argue coherently, sublimated into a need to "vote" down the comments of those they dislike). They take it all too personally. They fail to realize the internet is anonymous for the most part and that any of us calling any of them out or "making them look stupid" means *nothing* outside of this "virtual world".
Score: -12
|voting is pointless, isn't it?
so why worry?
Score: 0
|Hmmm...
Anyone think "blabbery" is going to be stupid enough to show his face in this topic?
Quote {blabbery}:
"The accusation is strong enough that they have in practice been convicted already."
Uh-huh. Yeah. Sure.
Pure comic genius... I almost hope he does show up again. Just for the sheer entertainment value of it all.
Score: -12
|much to do about nottin
Score: 1
|