Microsoft: Difference between revisions

Line 44:

The EU began an investigation of Microsoft in 1998 following a complaint by Sun Microsystems for not disclosing some interfaces to Windows NT. In August 2001, the EU expanded the investigation to look at how streaming media technology has been integrated into Windows.<ref>{{cite news |last=McCullagh |first=Declan |date=2002-07-01 |title=EU looks to wrap up Microsoft probe |url=http://www.news.com/2100-1001_3-941090.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260222223326/https://www.cnet.com/news/ |archive-date=22 Feb 2026|access-date=2025-08-23 |work=CNET}}</ref> Microsoft was found guilty of illegally abusing its dominant position in the operating system market<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |date=2007-09-17 |title=EUR-Lex - 62004TJ0201 - Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Grand Chamber) of 17 September 2007. Microsoft Corp. v Commission of the European Communities. |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150725161632/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |archive-date=2015-07-25 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=EUR-Lex}}</ref> in order to dominate the entertainment market and push out competitors. It did this by bundling Windows Media Player with the Windows operating system, despite them being two distinct products, allowing "that media player automatically to achieve a level of market penetration corresponding to that of the dominant undertaking’s client PC operating system, without having to compete on the merits with competing products".<ref name=":6" />

The case was settled and Microsoft was fined €497 million ($613 million) - the largest fine for abuse of a dominant position at the time{{~~Citation needed~~|~~reason~~=~~is this still the case?~~}} - as well as having to provide a version of its Windows operating system without a bundled media player<ref name=":7">{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=CNN}}</ref> (called Windows XP Home Edition N<ref name="WinXPSRedmondMag2">{{cite news |last=Bekker |first=Scot |date=2005-03-28 |title=European Windows Called 'Windows XP Home Edition N' |url=http://www.redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050407081820/http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |archive-date=2005-04-07 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=Redmondmag.com}}</ref><ref name="WinXPSBBC">{{cite news |date=2005-03-28 |title=Microsoft and EU reach agreement |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051222031525/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |archive-date=2005-12-22 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=BBC}}</ref>). However, this ruling could be seen as insufficient to reduce Microsoft's monopolistic control as the company priced it the same as its bundled counterpart and the ruling didn't prevent them from selling Windows XP Home Edition. Consumer interest was low, and major Original Equipment Manufacturers did not pre-install Windows XP N on their computers<ref name="WinXPlite">{{cite news |last=Wearden |first=Graeme |date=2005-06-28 |title=Windows XP-lite 'not value for money' |url=http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39131434,00.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051102014905/http://management.silicon.com/government/0%2C39024677%2C39131434%2C00.htm |archive-date=2005-11-02 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=Silicon.com}}</ref>.

The case was settled and Microsoft was fined €497 million ($613 million) - the largest fine issued by the EU for abuse of a dominant position at the time<ref>{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine - CNN |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |website=CNN}}</ref> - as well as having to provide a version of its Windows operating system without a bundled media player<ref name=":7">{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=CNN}}</ref> (called Windows XP Home Edition N<ref name="WinXPSRedmondMag2">{{cite news |last=Bekker |first=Scot |date=2005-03-28 |title=European Windows Called 'Windows XP Home Edition N' |url=http://www.redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050407081820/http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |archive-date=2005-04-07 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=Redmondmag.com}}</ref><ref name="WinXPSBBC">{{cite news |date=2005-03-28 |title=Microsoft and EU reach agreement |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051222031525/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |archive-date=2005-12-22 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=BBC}}</ref>). However, this ruling could be seen as insufficient to reduce Microsoft's monopolistic control as the company priced it the same as its bundled counterpart and the ruling didn't prevent them from selling Windows XP Home Edition. Consumer interest was low, and major Original Equipment Manufacturers did not pre-install Windows XP N on their computers<ref name="WinXPlite">{{cite news |last=Wearden |first=Graeme |date=2005-06-28 |title=Windows XP-lite 'not value for money' |url=http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39131434,00.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051102014905/http://management.silicon.com/government/0%2C39024677%2C39131434%2C00.htm |archive-date=2005-11-02 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=Silicon.com}}</ref>.

See also: [[wikipedia:Microsoft_Corp._v_European_Commission|''Microsoft Corp. v European Commission'' (Wikipedia)]]

@@ Line 44: / Line 44: @@
 The EU began an investigation of Microsoft in 1998 following a complaint by Sun Microsystems for not disclosing some interfaces to Windows NT. In August 2001, the EU expanded the investigation to look at how streaming media technology has been integrated into Windows.<ref>{{cite news |last=McCullagh |first=Declan |date=2002-07-01 |title=EU looks to wrap up Microsoft probe |url=http://www.news.com/2100-1001_3-941090.html |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20260222223326/https://www.cnet.com/news/ |archive-date=22 Feb 2026|access-date=2025-08-23 |work=CNET}}</ref> Microsoft was found guilty of illegally abusing its dominant position in the operating system market<ref name=":6">{{Cite web |date=2007-09-17 |title=EUR-Lex - 62004TJ0201 - Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Grand Chamber) of 17 September 2007. Microsoft Corp. v Commission of the European Communities. |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150725161632/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |archive-date=2015-07-25 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=EUR-Lex}}</ref> in order to dominate the entertainment market and push out competitors. It did this by bundling Windows Media Player with the Windows operating system, despite them being two distinct products, allowing "that media player automatically to achieve a level of market penetration corresponding to that of the dominant undertaking’s client PC operating system, without having to compete on the merits with competing products".<ref name=":6" />
-The case was settled and Microsoft was fined €497 million ($613 million) - the largest fine for abuse of a dominant position at the time{{Citation needed|reason=is this still the case?}} - as well as having to provide a version of its Windows operating system without a bundled media player<ref name=":7">{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=CNN}}</ref> (called Windows XP Home Edition N<ref name="WinXPSRedmondMag2">{{cite news |last=Bekker |first=Scot |date=2005-03-28 |title=European Windows Called 'Windows XP Home Edition N' |url=http://www.redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050407081820/http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |archive-date=2005-04-07 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=Redmondmag.com}}</ref><ref name="WinXPSBBC">{{cite news |date=2005-03-28 |title=Microsoft and EU reach agreement |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051222031525/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |archive-date=2005-12-22 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=BBC}}</ref>). However, this ruling could be seen as insufficient to reduce Microsoft's monopolistic control as the company priced it the same as its bundled counterpart and the ruling didn't prevent them from selling Windows XP Home Edition. Consumer interest was low, and major Original Equipment Manufacturers did not pre-install Windows XP N on their computers<ref name="WinXPlite">{{cite news |last=Wearden |first=Graeme |date=2005-06-28 |title=Windows XP-lite 'not value for money' |url=http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39131434,00.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051102014905/http://management.silicon.com/government/0%2C39024677%2C39131434%2C00.htm |archive-date=2005-11-02 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=Silicon.com}}</ref>.
+The case was settled and Microsoft was fined €497 million ($613 million) - the largest fine issued by the EU for abuse of a dominant position at the time<ref>{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine - CNN |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |website=CNN}}</ref> - as well as having to provide a version of its Windows operating system without a bundled media player<ref name=":7">{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=CNN}}</ref> (called Windows XP Home Edition N<ref name="WinXPSRedmondMag2">{{cite news |last=Bekker |first=Scot |date=2005-03-28 |title=European Windows Called 'Windows XP Home Edition N' |url=http://www.redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20050407081820/http://redmondmag.com/news/article.asp?EditorialsID=6625 |archive-date=2005-04-07 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=Redmondmag.com}}</ref><ref name="WinXPSBBC">{{cite news |date=2005-03-28 |title=Microsoft and EU reach agreement |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051222031525/http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/4388349.stm |archive-date=2005-12-22 |access-date=2025-08-23 |publisher=BBC}}</ref>). However, this ruling could be seen as insufficient to reduce Microsoft's monopolistic control as the company priced it the same as its bundled counterpart and the ruling didn't prevent them from selling Windows XP Home Edition. Consumer interest was low, and major Original Equipment Manufacturers did not pre-install Windows XP N on their computers<ref name="WinXPlite">{{cite news |last=Wearden |first=Graeme |date=2005-06-28 |title=Windows XP-lite 'not value for money' |url=http://management.silicon.com/government/0,39024677,39131434,00.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20051102014905/http://management.silicon.com/government/0%2C39024677%2C39131434%2C00.htm |archive-date=2005-11-02 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=Silicon.com}}</ref>.
 See also: [[wikipedia:Microsoft_Corp._v_European_Commission|''Microsoft Corp. v European Commission'' (Wikipedia)]]