Microsoft says seeks quick action with court move (Microsoft sues Europe)

Reuters | September 7, 2005

[HAL9000]

BRUSSELS, Sept 7 (Reuters) - Microsoft said on Wednesday it sued the European Commission in an EU court to gain quick resolution of a question surrounding sanctions imposed by the Commission on the company.

The Commission has required Microsoft to share communications protocols -- or software rules of the road -- with rival makers of computer servers, ruling that it abused its dominance of the Windows operating system.

Microsoft does not want to share that information with "open source" publishers who might make public what it says is confidential information.

"This filing is the result of the agreement reached with the Commission in June to put this particular issue to the court for guidance and to avoid any further delay in the process," a Microsoft spokesman said of the filing in the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg.

"We are taking this step so the court can begin its review of this issue now, given its far-reaching implications for the protection of our intellectual property rights around the world," the spokesman said.

[TXBSAFH]

Well, at least on the basis of net worth, the evil empire of Redman is bigger then Europe

[v. crow]

What can this European court do if MicroSoft chooses not to comply? I don't see how they can realistically make Windows illegal in the European Union by court mandate.

[HAL9000]

What can this European court do if MicroSoft chooses not to comply? I don't see how they can realistically make Windows illegal in the European Union by court mandate.

They can impose hefty fines.

If Microsoft wins the lawsuit, it's likely that the next lawsuit will be against Samba, which allows Linux and Windows computers to share files, printers, etc. Microsoft doesn't want to allow their customers to do that.

[v. crow]

Excuse me, I misread the information in my ignorance. The European Commission is the executive branch of the EU, not a court. They laid an arbitrary fine of $613 million on the company.

Still, with that in mind, I don't see what forces MicroSoft to pay. I mean, what is Europe going to do? Ban the import of Windows?

[MarkL]

[Tinfoil hat on]

To this day, I've got this feeling that the vast majority of Windows vulnerabilities have been purposely engineered into Microsoft products for one reason... Microsoft has been forced into the open standards world of the Internet, using protocols such as the TCP/IP protocol suite, including standards such as LDAP. If Microsoft could show that these protocols are "inherently insecure" (even though it's through the Microsoft implementation) they could try to push proprietary communications protocol standards on the rest of the industry. And if they keep those protocols a secret, they would effectively shut every other company out of the market.

Mark

[Tinfoil hat off]

[Budgie]

"Still, with that in mind, I don't see what forces MicroSoft to pay. I mean, what is Europe going to do? Ban the import of Windows?"

Yes, they would.

[HAL9000]

It appears the European Commission wants Microsoft to release their source code, but MS does not want to allow open source projects to have it.

[dhuffman@awod.com]

"abused its dominance" Will the EU or its lackeys ever be guilty of this heinous crime? Doubt it.

[Amalie]

Tinfoil hat or not, what you lay is certainly logical. However, like all inventors, Microsoft wants to maintain its proprietary technology and secrets in-house. The term 'inherently insecure' sums up what happens when those protocols are made available to anyone; they can impact every single computer owner. I personally am happier having a secure product then open competition with greater risk.

Perhaps the way out of this is for Microsoft to develop a simple freeware operating system that outside users will need to build their own security protocols into; the MS 'premium' product retains its place, and the crybabies will have to shut up...

[EricT.]

Perhaps the way out of this is for Microsoft to develop a simple freeware operating system...

They could always re-release Windows 98 as freeware. They might as well, with so many pirated copies of it floating around.

[antiRepublicrat]

It appears the European Commission wants Microsoft to release their source code

I don't think it's the source code, just the specs so that others can write code to interoperate.

[upchuck]

It appears the European Commission wants Microsoft to release their source code, but MS does not want to allow open source projects to have it.

Precisely! Because if Micro$loth has to show their source code they will become the laughingstock of knowledgeable programmers the world over. We'll finally get to see their bloated, bug infested code.

[zeugma]

It appears the European Commission wants Microsoft to release their source code, but MS does not want to allow open source projects to have it.

Not exactly. They want the communications protocols to be open. That's a big difference. It's about interoperability.

[Bush2000]

Not exactly. They want the communications protocols to be open. That's a big difference. It's about interoperability.

Yeah, but "open" doesn't come without a price. There's a license fee associated with the protocol information. Microsoft obviously wants to prevent open source licensors from gaining access to the protocols and then releasing the information publicly; either in source code or documentation form. If OSS licensors were to do that, MS suing them wouldn't help a whole lot, because the code and/or documentation would be widely disseminated and undoubtedly incorporated into countless projects; if not directly, then through careful analysis of the code. Personally, I don't blame MS or IBM or any other big company that wants to keep its IP private. Handing it over to OSS folks would be like injecting it into the public domain without reasonable compensation.

[zeugma]

Ya know, if Microsoft thinks it is so wrong to use open protocols, perhaps they should rethink their usage of TCP/IP. After all, if open protocols are bad, they should feel good about eliminating them from their products as possible.

Perhaps they could get some of those folks they offshoring to china to work on their new networking protocols.

[HAL9000]

Not exactly. They want the communications protocols to be open. That's a big difference. It's about interoperability.

Interoperability is a good thing, and I'd prefer to see the protocol specifications published.

However, according to Dow Jones Newswires, the specific issue in this lawsuit is about source code.

[Bush2000]

Ya know, if Microsoft thinks it is so wrong to use open protocols, perhaps they should rethink their usage of TCP/IP. After all, if open protocols are bad, they should feel good about eliminating them from their products as possible.

This isn't about open protocols such as TCP/IP, etc. It's about closed protocols that MS created (ie. ActiveDirectory, domain server logins, etc) that the EU wants opened up for interoperability.