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
*for example by punishing one of "your" companies for something YOU think it's not an issueAgain it's not an issue with people.
PS: Congratulations BTW. I see points 1, 2, and 3 were fully accomplished. I didn't expect any less from the MM. :cool:
Just to remind people of the topic. M$ is going to be punished for failing to comply to a ruling that exempted them from antitrust proceedings and fines regarding bundling of IE into Windows OS, as long as other browsers were also offered as options. This is an issue and anti-competitive behavior because it ties an internet browser to a single OS, and viceversa. The grand mayority of PC users use it for web browsing and any browser is good enough. By bundling it with the OS, no other browser is required and that damages competition. IE is the default winner and does not require to be the superior product to attain and mantain market dominance. This again is an issue, because as many people pointed out in this thread, many websites only work with IE (a direct result of IE's and M$'s market abuse), and IE only works on Windows. Reliance on IE forces reliance on Windows. Chrome, Mozilla and other browsers are a real threat to Windows as users may find that not only they are better, but their experience (which is limited to e-mailing and web browsing, maybe media play) may as well be better in Linux (for example) since those programs are available there, and in fact originated there and Linux is free.
Off topic: We do have the same political issues. You have been conditioned to think different.
Antitrust laws are not made to protect companies or its products from other companies or products, they exist to protect PEOPLE by ensuring that a free market, a real one, exists. And this includes minorities, so your point about "use the alternative if you want" is moot. Even if/when IE is the most used browser because the mayority of people are stupid and lazy enough, that does not exclude the right for the "minorities" to have a free market where all alternatives (likewise the one this hypothetical minority wants) have the oportunity to compete in equal terms, and as such succeed and be rewarded on same merits as the competition, and on merits alone. Mozilla does not have the same opportunity to succeed and be rewarded (to thrive) and as such less R&D can be justified and that simply hurts competition.
Off topic: we have very different political issues. You have been conditioned to think they are the same.
And just as an example. Are you worried at least even a bit about your central government being set on making your culture and millenary mother language dissapear in the name of "a stronger Spain"? That's what I thought.
As for political issue we face the same thing. English is the dominate language here in the states and our government refuses to acknowledge that as its "Not good for America to be tied to one language" and they are systematically erasing our Constitution line by line to coincide with the world economy. ;) Wanna try again?
Also the US Constitution gives me freedom of speech in my nation. Freedom of religion and Freedom of the press. I guess those are outdated also? :laugh:
BTW we are back to confirming my view of "americans" at least you show that you think like all the other ones I've ever spoken to. Economy == everything.Where did I talk about those again?
They HAVE taken steps to erase it. It's not an hypothetical situation that I have to worry about, it's real.Second amendment would be a good place to start, but it's not related to this topic and I know it will enrage many people, so... just ignore.
Regarding other things, there's many and I don't know the details enough to discuss it here. What I do know is that EVERY other country has changed their laws over the time to adapt to the changing world reality and as much as you might think it's not necessary for your constitution. IT IS.
BTW you are just changing the subject after every turn, moving forward so that the subject doesn't catch you. Did you notice that?Not at all.
And by centralized I meant Madrid BTW, not the EU.
Anyway we should get back on topic.
NDAA removed our right to a speedy and fair trial if the government deems you a "terrorist". It also allows unlimited detainment without trial.
ANYWAY we need to get on topic. I say EU sucks. You say MS sucks. We agree to disagree. Savvy? :toast:
As to the latest sentence, in one way or another we all feel the same everywhere. But it's not completely true, tho having more than 2 options does help.
Edit: Anyway I'm done. lol Im not gonna post anymore off topic stuff before we BOTH get an ear full.
The EU is so far up it's own arse it can't see what day it is, this is nothing compared to their ludicrous human rights laws and the 100's of other useless laws and regulations that come out of Brusels, the EU should be disbanded ASAP IMO, either that or at the very least the UK get someone into power who has the balls to tell all the eurocrats to sling their hooks, can't come sooner.
OT, every single phone I have bought comes with it's own browser, as does IOS and OSX and countless other operating systems, what exactly is the bloody problem?