Wednesday, October 24th 2012
European Commission sends Statement of Objections to Microsoft on Browser Compliance
The European Commission has informed Microsoft of its preliminary view that Microsoft has failed to comply with its commitments to offer users a choice screen enabling them to easily choose their preferred web browser. In 2009, the Commission had made these commitments legally binding on Microsoft (see IP/09/1941). The sending of a statement of objections does not prejudge the final outcome of the investigation.
In its statement of objections, the Commission takes the preliminary view that Microsoft has failed to roll out the browser choice screen with its Windows 7 Service Pack 1, which was released in February 2011. From February 2011 until July 2012, millions of Windows users in the EU may not have seen the choice screen. Microsoft has acknowledged that the choice screen was not displayed during that period.
In December 2009, the Commission had made legally binding on Microsoft commitments offered by the US software company to address competition concerns related to the tying of Microsoft's web browser, Internet Explorer, to its dominant client PC operating system Windows (see IP/09/1941, MEMO/09/558 and MEMO/09/559). Specifically, Microsoft committed to make available for five years (i.e. until 2014) in the European Economic Area a "choice screen" enabling users of Windows to choose in an informed and unbiased manner which web browser(s) they wanted to install in addition to, or instead of, Microsoft's web browser. The choice screen was provided as of March 2010 to European Windows users who have Internet Explorer set as their default web browser.
The Commission had opened proceedings to investigate the potential non-compliance with the browser choice commitments on 16 July 2012 (see IP/12/800).
Background on the commitments decision
In January 2009, the Commission sent Microsoft a Statement of Objections, outlining its preliminary view that the company abused its dominant position in the market for client PC operating systems through the tying of Internet Explorer to Windows (see MEMO/09/15). In order to address the Commission's concerns, Microsoft offered commitments, including the set-up of a "ballot screen" in the Windows PC operating system, from which consumers could easily choose their preferred internet browser (see MEMO/09/352). In October 2009, the Commission market tested an improved proposal from Microsoft (see MEMO/09/439).
In light of the reactions to the market test, the Commission concluded that the commitments would remedy its competition concerns and made the commitments legally binding on Microsoft in December 2009, pursuant to Article 9 of the Antitrust Regulation No 1/2003.
More information about the browser choice commitment is available at: ec.europa.eu/competition/consumers/web_browsers_choice_en.html
Procedural background
A statement of objections is a formal step in Commission investigations. The Commission informs the parties concerned in writing of the objections raised against them and the parties can reply in writing and request an oral hearing to present comments.
The Commission takes a final decision only after the parties have exercised their rights of defence.
If a company has breached commitments made legally binding by way of an Article 9 decision, it may be fined up to 10% of its total annual turnover.
In its statement of objections, the Commission takes the preliminary view that Microsoft has failed to roll out the browser choice screen with its Windows 7 Service Pack 1, which was released in February 2011. From February 2011 until July 2012, millions of Windows users in the EU may not have seen the choice screen. Microsoft has acknowledged that the choice screen was not displayed during that period.
In December 2009, the Commission had made legally binding on Microsoft commitments offered by the US software company to address competition concerns related to the tying of Microsoft's web browser, Internet Explorer, to its dominant client PC operating system Windows (see IP/09/1941, MEMO/09/558 and MEMO/09/559). Specifically, Microsoft committed to make available for five years (i.e. until 2014) in the European Economic Area a "choice screen" enabling users of Windows to choose in an informed and unbiased manner which web browser(s) they wanted to install in addition to, or instead of, Microsoft's web browser. The choice screen was provided as of March 2010 to European Windows users who have Internet Explorer set as their default web browser.
The Commission had opened proceedings to investigate the potential non-compliance with the browser choice commitments on 16 July 2012 (see IP/12/800).
Background on the commitments decision
In January 2009, the Commission sent Microsoft a Statement of Objections, outlining its preliminary view that the company abused its dominant position in the market for client PC operating systems through the tying of Internet Explorer to Windows (see MEMO/09/15). In order to address the Commission's concerns, Microsoft offered commitments, including the set-up of a "ballot screen" in the Windows PC operating system, from which consumers could easily choose their preferred internet browser (see MEMO/09/352). In October 2009, the Commission market tested an improved proposal from Microsoft (see MEMO/09/439).
In light of the reactions to the market test, the Commission concluded that the commitments would remedy its competition concerns and made the commitments legally binding on Microsoft in December 2009, pursuant to Article 9 of the Antitrust Regulation No 1/2003.
More information about the browser choice commitment is available at: ec.europa.eu/competition/consumers/web_browsers_choice_en.html
Procedural background
A statement of objections is a formal step in Commission investigations. The Commission informs the parties concerned in writing of the objections raised against them and the parties can reply in writing and request an oral hearing to present comments.
The Commission takes a final decision only after the parties have exercised their rights of defence.
If a company has breached commitments made legally binding by way of an Article 9 decision, it may be fined up to 10% of its total annual turnover.
90 Comments on European Commission sends Statement of Objections to Microsoft on Browser Compliance
And funny thing, you say it's a money grab and then say why don't they sue Apple et all. EXACTLY. If it's a money grab, why don't they sue Apple who has nearly twice as much money?? Hmm? :rolleyes:Until I find an "american" (ego, ego... who's putting all americans in the same bag now, again typical of US to call them America) who thinks differently and does not defend their precious companies over the actual people, I'll continue saying the same. Funny thing, you claim not all "americans" are the same, but you are 100% willingly taking that instance and being 100% the sterotype that I said (so are all other posters here so far). So...
I think if the EU wants to go after Microsoft for being a monopoly (which I believe it is), going after an included application (IE) is the wrong way to go as it really doesn't make much sense considering they have a better argument going after the O/S itself.
EDIT: wrong topic.
EU commission is corrupt.
As for the EU suing MS they started this stupid law when MS was still worth more then Apple. This is just a carry over from a few years ago. Give it time. The EU will be blaming Apple for something stupid soon.
I guess I'm ignorant regarding how the US trully is, because of the people I've known, the US governments and what they've done to the rest of the world, the US military and what they've done to other countries, the morality in movies, etc, etc. I don't and can't know one and every US citizen, but every exposure I've seen points in that direction. There are probably exceptions to the rule, as always, but that does not change the overall reality. I think that saying ALL in the way I said does not imply one and everyone. I don' think it's a language problem, just a US member wanting to imply that I put one and every US in the same bag in order to discredit my opinion, when I'm just describing a trait that IS common to the grand mayority, whether they see it or not.It was part of a negotiation, if you read what it's all about. If M$ included that option (and other changes) they would avoid further problems. But they failed to comply to that simple mandate, meaning that they went against something they were legally tied to and as such they are going to be punished. It has nothing to do with other antitrust cases the EU might or might not have against M$.WTF are you talking about now. I've only talked about a single trait, one that you've vastly proven to have: defending companies over everything else. And you are doing exactly that, so of course you fit in that demographic, and has nothing to do with perception. I've not described anything else regarding how US citicens are (except the ego and calling themselves americans) so please stop playing the victim.
EDIT: A few days ago, I made a comment about why humans hurt other humans. Your reply? Because it's fun. And then a mention to a TV channel and Iraqui war. Someone else said something like "yeah better than superbowl". Jokes, certainly (well I hope), but it really shows something underneath. Simply the disposition to make fun of something like that... So don't blame me for how I see you, YOU are the only one responsible for that.
As for MS I agree they should pay the fine since they agreed with it. My point is the fine isn't justified and SCREAMS corruption and money grabbing. It needs to be even handed. Instead they mailed them a bill.
Oh and FYI I know way more then 10 Europeans.
EDIT: What ego are you talking about? I mean really. Im an American. I call myself an American. I was born in America. What would you have me call myself? Seriously you have a horrible perception of things. Americans are not anymore evil then any other culture. Are you mad about the Olympics?
But it's not a place to discuss this so let's just leave it at that.
I read 1984 when I was 11. And at least twice again when older. AS to the rest. WHAT ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT? lol now that's the only thing left. HAHAHA. :roll: OMG. So I did something, apparently, you accused me so you know what it's suposed to be. And 2 post later you do the same, yet worse, multiplicated by 100x. We are raised to hate the US right? The EU is The Party right? Because we are commies right? OMG. And you blame me for "putting you in a bag", for "tying" you to an ideology. OMG. I have no words really.
EDIT: America is more than the US. I talked about US citizens, which you equaled to americans in your response. I've not spoken a word about Argentina, just to name one country. But apparently according to you, I did? I mean I am an anti-american commie right?
**V That's what I'm describing MM.
I didn't realize that when I deployed to Iraq, that I had ruined it!
Had I known that, I would have picked a different war!
EDIT: Those independant states are good at kickin some EU ass! Source: 'Merican History.
I can understand why the commission is jealous.
People that live in other countries in North America are known by their country. People from Canada are Canadians, Mexicans are from Mexico, Panamanians are from Panama, etc. Are those just as terrible? It's called nationalism, pride in ones country.
I said it's because of the ego of a country that thinks is the be all end all of everything, that it has come to be that way (calling themselves Americans as if they were the representation of America). It's not people really, it's just that those traits are part of the culture. US citizens always bitch about their government (like the rest of the world), but if non "american" people says anything related, well, you have this thread. In my experience ask any european, i.e. a Spaniard and (s)he will tell you "yeah my country/government sucks". You guys always find a BUT... you might say it sucks at some point, but somehow it is the best in the world and this thread is the only proof I need. And not only on politics, it's everything and not only in people's behavior it's the art too. Books, movies... USA thinks it's the best thing ever in history and does not hesitate to tell the world how awesome (not) you are. You suck, just as the rest of the world. ;)
Spain sucks and the EU sucks, but from time to time they do something right, like pursuing anti-competitive behaviors. It's not just M$. They are investigating Google (and offered something similar to what they offered M$ to avoid proceedings and the fine. What? Google's money is not as good as M$'s?). Apple. Samsung. Gazprom, Intel was already punished...
The communists never died, they just reinvented themselves lol.:laugh:
Someone has an inferiority complex, somewhere, I guess that's true. Someone somewhere wears a hat too, I guess, both true statements. But as to the former keep looking, the only one showing inferiority complex here are the US members feeling they need to blame a foreign government body to excuse the behavior of "one of their own".
Now come on MM continue trolling, be a good troll (you've been doing it right so far, according to the manual I guess):
1- Fail to have a valid argument.
2- Don't address the current subject/post.
3- Change the subject. Divert. I'm sure at some point you'll feel like you succeeded in whatever you're trying to achieve. (not) ;)