Microsoft ruling may not bolster Europe's new case, warns lawyer

Don't count your chickens...


A landmark court ruling which last year backed the European Commission's last competition action against Microsoft may not be as helpful in its current action as has been widely thought, according to a competition lawyer.

The commission's 2004 decision to fine Microsoft €497m was backed by the Court of the First Instance of the European Communities (CFI) and the judgment is widely regarded as having strengthened the commission's hand for cases it has subsequently launched.

But an analysis of the decision by competition lawyer Adrian Wood of Pinsent Masons, the law firm behind OUT-LAW.COM, found that the case offers fewer comforts to the commission than many have assumed.

"There is still no real consensus on what [the Microsoft ruling] tells us for the future," Wood told OUT-LAW Radio. "The ability to have some form of over-arching broad set of principles was lost a little bit and so in that sense there is a disappointment there. We did not get crisp, clear, practical pointers for generic use."

The commission has begun competition cases against Intel, Qualcomm, and a new action against Microsoft in recent months, moves that have been seen as a reflection of its post-ruling confidence. But Wood said it ought not to rely too heavily on a judgment seen by some as flawed.

"In terms of the bundling of media player to the Windows environment the CFI took on board all of the commission's arguments without question," said Wood. "I think there were certain elements of the judgment where the commission is going to hesitate somewhat before relying fully on [it] as a way for going forward."

The new investigation into Microsoft will look into whether it is legal for a company with its market dominance to include web browser Internet Explorer with its Windows operating system. It will also look at whether the operating system allows for enough interoperability with other companies' software.

The case was sparked by a complaint from competing browser maker Opera. That company's chief executive Jon von Tetchzner told OUT-LAW Radio that he has every confidence that the previous Microsoft case is a positive precedent that he thinks will be followed.

"I think there are similarities. This is in some ways a very similar case to the recent [one]," he said. "I think if anything the browser case is even clearer. I do believe there are similarities. We are expecting good results out of this."

The two cases are similar: both involve questions of the interoperability of the Windows system and both rest on the legality of software bundling. The previous case hinged on the bundling of a media player with the system, the new case on the inclusion of a web browser.

Copyright © 2008, OUT-LAW.com

OUT-LAW.COM is part of international law firm Pinsent Masons.


Other stories you might like

  • Prisons transcribe private phone calls with inmates using speech-to-text AI

    Plus: A drug designed by machine learning algorithms to treat liver disease reaches human clinical trials and more

    In brief Prisons around the US are installing AI speech-to-text models to automatically transcribe conversations with inmates during their phone calls.

    A series of contracts and emails from eight different states revealed how Verus, an AI application developed by LEO Technologies and based on a speech-to-text system offered by Amazon, was used to eavesdrop on prisoners’ phone calls.

    In a sales pitch, LEO’s CEO James Sexton told officials working for a jail in Cook County, Illinois, that one of its customers in Calhoun County, Alabama, uses the software to protect prisons from getting sued, according to an investigation by the Thomson Reuters Foundation.

    Continue reading
  • Battlefield 2042: Please don't be the death knell of the franchise, please don't be the death knell of the franchise

    Another terrible launch, but DICE is already working on improvements

    The RPG Greetings, traveller, and welcome back to The Register Plays Games, our monthly gaming column. Since the last edition on New World, we hit level cap and the "endgame". Around this time, item duping exploits became rife and every attempt Amazon Games made to fix it just broke something else. The post-level 60 "watermark" system for gear drops is also infuriating and tedious, but not something we were able to address in the column. So bear these things in mind if you were ever tempted. On that note, it's time to look at another newly released shit show – Battlefield 2042.

    I wanted to love Battlefield 2042, I really did. After the bum note of the first-person shooter (FPS) franchise's return to Second World War theatres with Battlefield V (2018), I stupidly assumed the next entry from EA-owned Swedish developer DICE would be a return to form. I was wrong.

    The multiplayer military FPS market is dominated by two forces: Activision's Call of Duty (COD) series and EA's Battlefield. Fans of each franchise are loyal to the point of zealotry with little crossover between player bases. Here's where I stand: COD jumped the shark with Modern Warfare 2 in 2009. It's flip-flopped from WW2 to present-day combat and back again, tried sci-fi, and even the Battle Royale trend with the free-to-play Call of Duty: Warzone (2020), which has been thoroughly ruined by hackers and developer inaction.

    Continue reading
  • American diplomats' iPhones reportedly compromised by NSO Group intrusion software

    Reuters claims nine State Department employees outside the US had their devices hacked

    The Apple iPhones of at least nine US State Department officials were compromised by an unidentified entity using NSO Group's Pegasus spyware, according to a report published Friday by Reuters.

    NSO Group in an email to The Register said it has blocked an unnamed customers' access to its system upon receiving an inquiry about the incident but has yet to confirm whether its software was involved.

    "Once the inquiry was received, and before any investigation under our compliance policy, we have decided to immediately terminate relevant customers’ access to the system, due to the severity of the allegations," an NSO spokesperson told The Register in an email. "To this point, we haven’t received any information nor the phone numbers, nor any indication that NSO’s tools were used in this case."

    Continue reading

Biting the hand that feeds IT © 1998–2021