Softening the blow
- Reduce text size Decrease text size
- Increase text size Increase text size
- Print article Print
- Jump to comments Comment
- Share this article Share
- Email article to a friend Email
In an editorial some 15 months ago, Information Age gave its opinion on the latest development in the European Commission's legal battle with software giant Microsoft: "All the historical precedents suggest that the EU's judgement on Microsoft won't change anything."
In an editorial some 15 months ago, Information Age gave its opinion on the latest development in the European Commission's legal battle with software giant Microsoft: "All the historical precedents suggest that the EU's judgement on Microsoft won't change anything... What is the betting that, in a friendlier political climate, there will be an accord that has about as much business impact as its anti-trust antecedents?"
At the time, that opinion was somewhat out of step with developments. The commission had just levied a large fine on Microsoft, ordered it to reveal interface information and to unbundle its media player software. Later, when Microsoft stalled, a fine of some $5 million a day was threatened.
The latest news emerging from Brussels, however, suggests the scepticism was justified, and that any competitors hoping for a legally enforced reduction in Microsoft's powers will probably have a long, long wait. The political climate has indeed changed.
In September 2005, Neelie Kroes, who replaced the hard-line Mario Monti as Competition Commissioner in November 2004, made a speech to New York lawyers in which she signalled a clear change of course. "I like aggressive competition, including by dominant companies," she said. "I don't care if it may hurt competitors as long as it ultimately benefits consumers."
Already, Monti's tough line against Microsoft has been softened. Instead of applying tough fines to force Microsoft into compliance, Kroes has sent the case back for a judicial review.
Kroes' advisors say that she is not taking an easy path, but that she is sympathetic to the US approach, which assesses possible anti-trust violations in terms of their impact on the consumer, rather than on the market place. If it cannot be shown that a dominant supplier is hurting the consumer, then they will be left alone. Microsoft has never denied its dominance - but argues that it pushed prices down and encouraged take up of technology.
So while Microsoft is facing some tough competition from Google and from open source, the regulators seem to be backing off.
