"The European Union's antitrust agency threatened Microsoft today with fines of up to $4 million a day and claimed that the company is overcharging for the information rivals need to make their products work smoothly with Windows", reports Computerworld.com , today.
..........Microsoft, however, immediately said the EU is overreaching. "It's hard to see how the Commission can argue that even patented innovation must be made available for free," Brad Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, said in a statement.
In a news conference today, EU Commission spokesman Jonathan Todd voiced the agency's impatience. "It is a very unusual situation. It is the first time we have been confronted by a company which has failed to comply with an antitrust decision. So we are in somewhat unknown territory."
"This is a company which apparently does not like to comply with antitrust decisions," Todd said.
Microsoft lost a 2004 ruling in the EU, which fined the company $613 million and said it must offer protocol documentation to other vendors so that they can make their server software interoperable with Windows clients and servers. In July 2006, the Commission slapped Microsoft with another fine -- this one totaled $357 million -- for not providing complete documentation and not making previously-set deadlines.
The latest fine, if levied, could amount to as much as $4 million and be applied retroactively to July 13, 2006. An additional daily fine of $661,000 could also be applied to the months between December 2005 and July 2006.
Microsoft objected on almost every level.
"Microsoft has spent three years and many millions of dollars to comply with the European Commission's decision," said Smith. "We submitted a pricing proposal to the Commission last August and have been asking for feedback on it since that time. We're disappointed that this feedback is coming six months later and in its present form, but we're committed to working hard to address the Commission's Statement of Objections as soon as we receive it."
Smith blasted the Commission for trying to force Microsoft to give away its intellectual property. "The proposed findings suggest that unless our intellectual property is innovative and patentable, it has to be made available royalty free. That has never been the standard for software or other intellectual property."
Not so fast, responded Todd: "The Commission does not want Microsoft to give away the fruits of its research for free." But the fees it's proposed are out of line.
"It is regrettable that the Commission has been obliged to take this step," Todd said. "But it is solely the attitude of this company that has led to this problem." ===============================================
Personal View
It seems 'the battle of wits' that started last week at the US Supreme Court, as speculated in my Feb 23rd post, "Microsoft Case May Have Global Reach", has been spreading it's spider-net to strangle Microsoft in other parts of the world too.
That the world is divided on US politically, Microsoft is but a victim of vendetta and political vengeance of the bi-party political divide that is roasting with rising heat with Mitt Romney Joining 2008 US Presidential Race on the 2nd week of Feb. last.
This is more so now and shall be at it's worst ebb, I may be excused to add, but with almost dead certainty, as the fight this time there in US is not just confined between two political parties rather gone down much critical, being gender-biased.
As the entire 'Corporate World' is under the dark cloud of speculations and rumours spreading their wings, let the 'Final Verdict' on Microsoft be expedited with greater urgency and time-bound.
For further reference,
Microsoft issued this statement, from Brad Smith,
The Associated Press
Bloomberg News.
The commission's news release
The commission's list of, frequently asked questions.
Love and Peace.
BEST OF FUTURE
No comments:
Post a Comment