main

Microsoft still hopes to settle with EC, exec says

malebolgia   on 11 October 2004 - 14:47 · 10 comments & 530 views

Advertisement (Why?)
Microsoft Corp. still hopes to settle with the European Commission over the sanctions ordered against it to correct its anticompetitive behavior, even as its appeal of the case winds its way through the legal channels, a senior company executive said Monday. "We definitely want to settle. We just said it in court and I'll say it again," Jean-Philippe Courtois, Microsoft's chief executive officer (CEO) for Europe, the Middle East, and Africa (EMEA), said at the Etre technology conference in Cannes.

The Commission ruled last March that Microsoft had abused its dominance in the PC operating systems market to gain an advantage in related markets, such as that for media players. It ordered the company to pay a fine of €497 million, or more than $600 million, and offer a version of its operating system without the Windows Media Player (WMP). It also ordered it to reveal enough Windows code to allow rivals to build competing server software that works well with Windows.

News source: InfoWorld


Cont...

At present the new venture is being called "Exclaim," but this is apparently only a temporary name and is likely to be replaced before the firm starts trading. Cousens is joined in the new venture by Europlay Capital Advisers, the Los Angeles based firm which is headed by industry veterans Sean Brennan and Mark Dyne and has advised on a number of major industry deals in recent years.

It's expected that along with the Cheltenham and Manchester studios - accounting for some 160 employees - "Exclaim" will also take possession of several of Acclaim's products in development, including Interview with a Made Man and Heist.


Post a comment · Send to friend Comments · There are 10 additional comments
(6 replies) #1 SquareSoft0 on 11 Oct 2004 - 19:25
How DARE they include a program to help people starting into computers be able to run media formats!
#1.1 noyb on 11 Oct 2004 - 19:37
But thats not why they did it. MS knows that the typical user will only use whats in front of them, an example of where they have done this before is IE, now by having the media player installed to 9x% of users they have almost free reign on what content they will be using giving them a chance to promote their other prioritys such as WMA/V.

Bottom line is dont be so naive and believe the MS spin machine, they want to use one monopoly to create another one, its what they have done and will keep on doing, again, look back at how they got IE into the system.
#1.2 SquareSoft0 on 12 Oct 2004 - 06:10
"reign" "naive" "spin machine" "monopoly"
Typical angsty kid trying to act like a 'rebel.' Save your BS, an OS needs to play media, ESPECIALLY if that OS comes prepackaged with some. If they hadn't then the people who use WMP because 'it's there' wouldn't know what to do. You assume they either have an internet connection or the know-how that there are other media players out there to buy. Whether they have bad intentions from integrating it, it's still way too illogical to NOT integrate it. Save your BS for your blogs.
#1.3 noyb on 12 Oct 2004 - 11:22
It should be left to the OEM to decide what media player and browser is to be included in the package they are selling not MS. If they were to de-intergrate both of these items from the OS it would allow competing companies to make a decent pitch at getting their products to a larger audience.

And don't you dare come at me with some attack and try to make me look like somebody who doesn't know what he is talking about, if the EU think its a valid case, and if the DOJ originally passed the ruling that MS were abusing their monopoly then im not alone am i. I think you should do a little reading on how exactly they bullied OEM's into including IE into the package with threats of removed licences and producing fake videotapes to try and sway those making a ruling on these matters.
#1.4 Nichotin on 12 Oct 2004 - 14:10
I agree with the ruling, but for different reasons. The problem is not the media player itself, but those proprietary file formats. A better deal would be to force them to support the good and open formats we have, and assist in developing some more to fill the gaps.
#1.5 SquareSoft0 on 12 Oct 2004 - 23:54
Left to the OEMs!? You're now assuming ALL versions of Windows come from an OEM of some type, for your argument to hold ANY water the world would have to somehow limit ALL versions of Windows to go through the OEM process first. "If, then" arguments are utter BS.

Edit: Sorry, forgot to berate you for your "threats" comment about IE. Internet Explorer is INTEGRATED INTO MANY Windows components, it CANNOT be removed and it has been this way for YEARS. The OEMs CANNOT remove IE even if they wanted to and you took this to the extent of making up these false allegations to support your already invalid argument.
#1.6 noyb on 13 Oct 2004 - 01:04
The majority of windows sales to home users and even a large chunk of the corporate market is through OEM's, this is the segment i was talking about, and of course MS would have the option in the retail versions.

And to say i made stuff up????, are you actually braindead or do you know nothing of the antitrust case with Netscape back in the early 90's. I made nothing up its just you dont obviously realise what went on, here is a few bullet points for you to go look up.

1) An Intel executive called as a witness quoted the vice president of MS as saying that netscape needed to be destroyed and the only way to do it was to give IE away free (more on this later).

2) Microsoft had threatened PC manufacturers with revoking their license to distribute Windows if they removed the Internet Explorer icon from desktop.

3) MS claimed that removing IE would slow down the PC, this tape was examined and found to be a false claim and that the tape was of different computers edited to make it look like one machine, MS withdrew the tape as evidence once it was proved to be FAKE.

This goes on and on and MS lost the case, but won on appeal once Bush was in power. My point is that the WMP case is just history repeating itself, MS do not compete with everybody else on fair grounds and should be punished accordingly.

Oh yeah, more on that IE free thing, another legal battle in which MS would of been charged with deception after agreeing to pay royalties and licensing fees to the developers of IE, Spyglass, and then including it free thus cheating them out of agreed revenue. Oh yeah they had to settle on that one because they could only of been found guilty.

My advice to you is to actually read up on things before you post comments against them, and again, dont you dare challenge me on things you have proven to know so little about, here is a link to get you started.
(2 replies) #2 SquareSoft0 on 13 Oct 2004 - 03:04
Sorry, none of your argument has been legally settled as fact. Your entire fact-base would be inadmissible in court because NONE of it has been officially settled, whether you want so or not. You still haven't shown that your argument ISN'T entirely "if, then" so you're completely discredited. You lose, go home.
#2.1 noyb on 13 Oct 2004 - 03:51
Im sorry does taking away an OEM's license for not putting the IE icon on the desktop not sound wrong to you, or how about making up a videotape to lie about the effects of removing IE, those are facts, oh and i suggest you watch the Gates deposition its a real good laugh.

Just quit it with the fan boy attitude, even a child could see that their aim is to affect one marketshare with another one. My concern here is lack of advancing the software we use and that can only be done through competition and MS will try any stunt to avoid competing with other companies. The IE example proved to us that because they crushed the market the product was left to rot without any update in 3 years, and it is only now that their is a small threat they are going to update it, do you think they would of if FF or Opera wasn't around.

In this example if MS take another monopoly with WM content, will we have the same race for innovation a few years from now or will they just leave it to rot like they did with the browser, like i said before if the OEM's have the control to choose what product goes with their machines we will all be better off because the companies making the products will fight tooth and nail to make the better version, and ill tell you now, if IE wasn't intergrated into the OS and had more competition on the OEM side, the sector that really matters to MS, it would be much better than it is now.
#2.2 SquareSoft0 on 13 Oct 2004 - 03:58
QUOTE
if IE wasn't

There you go, IF
if If IF
Guess what? IT IS.

Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!

Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.

Advertisement (Why?)