$613.5 million fine for Microsoft

By on March 23, 2004, 1:55 PM
As expected, the European Union yesterday backed a proposal to fine Microsoft for 497 million euros ($613.5 million) on their on-going antitrust investigation, Microsoft is expected to appeal.

[COLOR=#1951B9]If the full European Commission backs the fine as expected on Wednesday it would exceed the 462 million euro penalty imposed on Hoffman-La Roche AG in 2001 for being ringleader of a vitamin cartel.[/COLOR]

In the meantime, Microsoft and Lindows legal battle is set to continue this week.

User Comments: 6

Got something to say? Post a comment
---agissi--- said:
DAMN! Thats a LOT of money to lose! Microsoft or not, thats a chuck-a-change :DThey still have Lindows to lose to.. talk about free $$$ :)Just go make a law-suit M$ and you should be set for the rest of your life.
Rick said:
Looks like Bill Gates will have to dig into his 500 italian leather couches and find the change to pay that fine.... :rolleyes:
Masque said:
[quote][i]Originally posted by Rick [/i]Looks like Bill Gates will have to dig into his 500 italian leather couches and find the change to pay that fine.... :rolleyes: [/quote] I'll take odds that in the end he won't even have to pay a quarter of that amount.
lowman said:
I have to agree with Masque...he'll probably end up paying somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 Million or so...pocket change for Microsoft...
Mictlantecuhtli said:
Of course they appealed, it'll take months, if not years for this to happen. However, it's not only about money:[quote]As well as the fine, Microsoft is to be ordered to offer a version of its Windows operating system without Windows Media Player and to encourage computer makers to provide other audiovisual software.It must also license information to make the servers of rivals more compatible with Windows desktop machines. [/quote]I find it unlikely that Microsoft would include 3rd party audiovisual software on their CDs, so customers would have to download / buy them separately. Now, these average users who just click on media files and expect them to play, and who also remember Windows Media Player, would they install, say, VideoLAN client? I don't think so, because they've probably never heard of it. They've never have to hear about it, because WMP has played their files. So I think they'll just end up buying WMP separately (or downloading for free).This also brings out a question which, if I remember correctly, was asked by Rick in our previous forum - how much software should be included in an operating system? Better to create a new thread about this, but I don't think I've ever seen an operating system, with graphical user interface, without some form of audiovisual software. The main difference between Windows and others (I don't know about Mac OS) is, however, that the applications aren't 'locked in'. But again, everyday users don't even think about changing their players, and I don't think they would know how to, either.
Rick said:
I don't see any reason to cripple the operating system, no matter how greedy Microsoft may be. Adding features for multimedia and functionality is common with ALL operating systems and I think is a necessity.3rd party is fine, but I think we need to find some sort of way to be reasonable about it.
Load all comments...

Add New Comment

TechSpot Members
Login or sign up for free,
it takes about 30 seconds.
You may also...
Get complete access to the TechSpot community. Join thousands of technology enthusiasts that contribute and share knowledge in our forum. Get a private inbox, upload your own photo gallery and more.