Microsoft cancels E.U. anti-trust hearing

The recent anti-trust case with Microsoft, filed by the European Union, has been canceled by the Redmond software company, due to a dispute over the lacking attendance of European regulators who are serving as advisers. The hearing was originally scheduled for the first week of June, but senior E.U. officials wouldn't be able to be present at that time.

PC World have noted that Microsoft's vice president and deputy general counsel, Dave Heiner, has said, "We believe that holding the hearing at a time when key officials are out of the country would deny Microsoft our effective right to be heard and hence deny our 'rights of defense' under European law." Microsoft had suggested a hearing for the date of June 3-5, after it had been accused of breaking anti-trust laws by bundling Internet Explorer with Windows, but that date apparently coincides with an annual competition law conference in Zurich, which a majority of senior Commission antitrust officials aim to attend. Microsoft had also asked for a different date, but it has been said that they were denied.

The legal representative of Opera (famous for their Opera browser), Thomas Vinje, has said that Microsoft's excuse for canceling is "ridiculous." "Such people simply don't attend, and Microsoft knows it," he also noted, and came to the conclusion that Microsoft is afraid of facing the questions and evidence. Opera is not alone in thinking this, apparently, as other companies that are against Microsoft include Mozilla, Google and Symantec.

The current fine for Microsoft is at €1.7 billion, and regulators are considering raising that amount. The E.U. has a history of accusing the company for such reasons, with one example being the Windows Media Player case back in 2004. Hopefully this case gets sorted out quickly, or at the very least, a final date becomes clear.

Report a problem with article
Previous Story

Microsoft releases Windows Vista SP2 and Server 2008 SP2

Next Story

Microsoft to give first JavaOne keynote next month

34 Comments

Commenting is disabled on this article.

IE coming bundled with Windows isn't the point. It's that the user not being able to uninstall it makes it as if MS is forcing them to keep it and multiple browsers on one computer is silly. The user already having one they can't get rid of deters them from wanting another. It's not a solid case and it's not as if Windows is blocking the installations of others but it is what it is.

The point is OS's come with a web browser, while he defends redhat he condemns MS. Red hat is open source that is the only reason it comes with multiple browsers. Why would any business promote other peoples software with out a form of compensation. Your reasoning against MS is laughable.

Mekun said,
Your reasoning against MS is laughable.

Only if you fail to understand what the complaint is about and instead keep thinking this is just about whether the browser is bundled or not.

The "they do too" horse wont move an inch no matter how hard you beat it. It has been explained and rebutted ad nausea.

Mekun said,
The point is OS's come with a web browser, while he defends redhat he condemns MS. Red hat is open source that is the only reason it comes with multiple browsers. Why would any business promote other peoples software with out a form of compensation. Your reasoning against MS is laughable.

Did you skip over my post?

1) All of the browsers on Red Hat are removable, just like any other program.
2) Red Hat gives you choices not forced applications.
3) Red Hat isn't using their distro to force their own broken HTML implementation upon users, in an attempt to make standards-compliant browsers appear incompatible.

Ichi your bias is showing and bordering on trolling. Sorry not everyone wants to use linux. The Eu is just after some more money plain and simple. Does redhat come with a web browser?

Mekun said,
The Eu is just after some more money plain and simple.

Talk about trolling :D

Mekun said,
Does redhat come with a web browser?

Yes.
Sorry, what was your point again?

Mekun said,
... Does redhat come with a web browser?

Why, yes. It does.

It comes with a few browsers installed by default. Firefox, because it is popular. Epiphany (if you use Gnome) because that is the gnome-default browser.

And NONE of these are made by Red Hat to promote Red Hat's idiosyncratic implementation of HTML.
None of them are forced to be installed, and each is completely removable.

I am not sure what your point is, either...

Its like selling a car without tires and asking the customer what brand of tires they want on their car. Most of the time the customer doesn't care, they just want to drive. This entire case is a waste of time and money. It will probably have very little effect on anything except Microsoft's bank account.

Also, if you are going to put a restriction on browsers in Windows, I want to see a restriction on every other OS as well. I really hate double standards.

Finally, what happens if you don't have an internet connection, but need a browser to open specific things (ie. Router Control Panel), is Microsoft going to be forced to package all browsers on the DVD?

No - as long as you don't go out of your way to buy windows no IE version you will be fine - so basically any shop anywhere will be okay. Just don't request the no IE version - as I'm guessing that is the solution that will be put in place like the WMP fiasco.

But seriously, I have never had a problem getting firefox as my default browser....and while were at it how come OS-X doesn't come preconfigured with firefox? or Linux preconfigured with Opera?

(Note: I am OS agnostic, i have a Windows PC, a MacBook, and a notebook with Fedora)

So Microsoft should just say "Fine, we're fixing the problem. Solution? Microsoft software is no longer available for sale to EU customers"

THEN see how fast they come back to the table!!!! :P

Raa said,
So Microsoft should just say "Fine, we're fixing the problem. Solution? Microsoft software is no longer available for sale to EU customers"

THEN see how fast they come back to the table!!!! :P

When you say "they" you mean Microsoft, right?

Raa said,
So Microsoft should just say "Fine, we're fixing the problem. Solution? Microsoft software is no longer available for sale to EU customers"

THEN see how fast they come back to the table!!!! :P

Sure and then layoff of more than 50% of employees from MS because EU actually gives them money ( or you actually think the USA , Asia ( not forgetting that some countries also are checking MS "monopoly" ) , certain countries in the South America would make it up for MS just losing the Entire Europe Market ?

you guys are so funny , maybe they do stop selling to the EU market , but increase the price in lets say in Australia ? :P

but well at least we do know and this was talked on the other news , the seniors do not attend it ( not obligatory )

and for the people saying still on this ( well MS still didnt payed btw the fine since they still "fighting" for it )

Raa said,
So Microsoft should just say "Fine, we're fixing the problem. Solution? Microsoft software is no longer available for sale to EU customers"

THEN see how fast they come back to the table!!!! :P


1). The EU is huge.
2). The EU =/= the population of the EU countries.

The EU is not in the habit of punishing it's populace. It tries to represent the many many varied opinions and people within its borders.

As the EU market is bigger than the US market I would imagine they would comply with EU rules before American general consumer opinion - 'don't ya think?' Personally I have no issue with it being pre installed, what is ridiculous in this case is I don't see Apple also being 'done over' by the EU. This will set a trend and I'm surprised someone hasn't already tried to take on Apple.

microsoft shld simply sue google for not allowing users to use the live/bing search engine from google, or opera for not allowing users to use the ie engine in opera.
i love firefox, but i can't see what logic is there in this law suit.
seeing the response on the internet, i wonder if EU is a democratic organisation or one owned by corporations.

I guess they want you to get a new windows DVD each 2-3months with all the latest browsers pre-packaged

I guess they should do like the search provider (that didn't get any lawsuit as google is the dominant one and microsoft was only trying to push his) and create a "browser provider" which would contact microsoft for a list of the latest browser available and you would choose to use the one you prefer. Although I think having a browser pre-installed ( if choosed) is still a pre-requisite in this day of age !

Think about it: if Internet Explorer® doesn't come bundled with Windows®, how the hell are we supposed to visit mozilla.com to download Firefox in the first place?

--sarcastic--

Omkar� said,
Think about it: if Internet Explorer� doesn't come bundled with Windows�, how the hell are we supposed to visit mozilla.com to download Firefox in the first place?

--sarcastic--

My gentoo linux came without browser. I just said "portage, would you mind installing firefox?", and portage answered "sure, there you go"

Recon415 said,
Well fyi Windows doesn't have a package manager.

Nor does it ship without a browser. The point is, for all those going "but you need a browser to download firefox!!", that it can be done.

Well, Microsoft could make their own closed source version of "wget" and leave it to the OEMs to put batch files on the desktop using the MS wget to download firefox XD

although they'd have to leave some bits of Internets Exploder inside windows, otherwise stuff like Steam which has built in web browsing capabilities, would sorta fail.

/sarcasm

And replacing/compensating for that with another browser's engine would require a lot of effort from either Microsoft, the web browser developers or the third-party-software developers.

I think Opera (the desktop version, that is) has something common with Linux: both are good solid products, BUT both are ignored somewhat by their target markets.

The only difference is, the Opera people are making a fuss about it and complaining, despite they have something like 80% market share on non-PC devices (phones/smart phones mainly I think)

If Thomas Vinje's company sold Opera, and then Microsoft prevented it's installation under Windows, THEN Mr. Vinje's company would have a leg to stand on.

Since they don't, then (in my humble opinion), Mr. Vinje and his company have NO LEGS.

What a frackin' whiner. He (and many, many others) seem to forget a simple fact of Consumer Economics - specifically, the part called "Suppy & Demand": Make a better product and you will gain market-share. Make a product that is inferior and you will either loose or never attain the market-share levels you want.

Now that we see that IE's market-share percentage is dwindleing, isn't this proof of the above? I wonder if Mr. Vinje's company will now be bashing the company that is whittleing-away at IE's market-share? Anyone know what company / browser that is?

/me grins

I am sure this was posted earlier on the Front Page, but I don't see it any more?

Was the original removed and this "new" item posted?

markjensen said,
I am sure this was posted earlier on the Front Page, but I don't see it any more?

Was the original removed and this "new" item posted?


Good question... I couldn't find any other articles, and this one was suggested by an editor, heh.

They're still with the browser thingy? It's time to move on!! And I guess microsoft is kinda right. If the heavy weights dont attend, dont bother going!

Julius Caro said,
They're still with the browser thingy? It's time to move on!! And I guess microsoft is kinda right. If the heavy weights dont attend, dont bother going!

Neelie Kroes is a heavy weight, and she would be attending.

surrealvortex said,
How heavy is she?

I'd guess she's well over the 60kg.

And she's the European Commissioner for Competition, if that's what you meant

It would only be an anti-trust lawsuit if Microsoft prevented other browsers from being installed. I don't understand how Microsoft can continually be harassed about this when it's clearly not an issue.

spacer said,
It would only be an anti-trust lawsuit if Microsoft prevented other browsers from being installed. I don't understand how Microsoft can continually be harassed about this when it's clearly not an issue.


Flameboys coming in 3... 2... 1...

waah waah, EU only wants the money... jerks... waah waah :D

(in reality, it is of course the EU representing various companies' demands due to the specific nature of this case -- the EU *has* to, it's part of why it exists)