Posted on 07/28/2006 2:23:29 PM PDT by rivercat
European Commission said a full investigation may follow
Just when we think that Blu-ray and HD DVD will start showing up in mass production, the two formats enter into more trouble, this time with the European Commission. According to reports, the European Commission believes that the companies that are backing each format may have licensing terms that breach European competition rules. The report said that the European Commission launched an unofficial antitrust probe this month.
Toshiba, the leading company behind HD DVD and Sony the leading company behind Blu-ray both received letters from the European Commission earlier this month. According to a European Commission representative, "we sent a letter earlier this month to the makers of HD DVD and Blu-ray to request information about licensing." Toshiba did not respond to inquiries but Sony confirmed that it did receive a letter from the European Commission.
The European Commission is still waiting for all replies to come back. It will then decide whether or not to pursue a full anti-trust probe. A representative from Sony told reporters that "there are no indications of any complaint, nor of any antitrust concerns on the part of the Commission or anyone else."
Sony's Blu-ray format has been facing a barrage of issues since the start of the year. Sony's own Blu-ray players have been suffering from continual delays. According to earlier reports, Sony will be shipping its first Blu-ray player will be shipping only slightly ahead of its PlayStation 3 console -- currently scheduled for November 17th. On the HD DVD side, Toshiba announced earlier that it would be shipping its HD DVD players at a loss to gain a head start.
It will be Deja-Vu all over again for SONY.
Why's that? Neither format is a proprietary Sony format.
Both Blu-ray and HD-DVD will go the way of Betamax. So let it be written, so let it be done...
How can they both be anti-trust - they are competitors?
Sony is spearheading the BluRay format, so its safe to say Sony = Blu Ray. In a market as competitive as this a few months can make all the difference, not to mention Blu Ray being the significantly more expensive format. Also I doubt in practical viewing terms BR is going to look any better than HDDVD.
>>Sony is spearheading the BluRay format, so its safe to say Sony = Blu Ray. In a market as competitive as this a few months can make all the difference, not to mention Blu Ray being the significantly more expensive format. Also I doubt in practical viewing terms BR is going to look any better than HDDVD.<<
I don't know... on a PC, non-interlaced makes a difference - maybe it will on DVD's.
Remember these are European Union bureaucrats.
Anyone other than me notice that Europe seems to be doing extraordinary things to hold back progress? They sue Microsoft for being too successful, and not freely distributing the source code. They try to sue Apple for not freely supporting non-iPod music players with iTunes. Now they are trying to kill a new technology that will allow us to make HDTV movies in a portable format ecomically viable.
Just as Beta vs. VHS; market forces will determine which technology will win, not some gov't beaucrat. This is the way it has always been, and the way it should be. If you can make a better technology, go for it.
Though you live for obfuscation and (attempted) know-it-all-ism, the fact is Sony stands the most to lose if Blu-ray tanks--you know it, I know it and HLF knows it--so his point is valid in the context that yet another format Sony is backing will, potentially, meet an untimely end.
Further, if BR goes belly-up (or merely meets LD levels of acceptance), PS3 will be in far worse shape than it already finds itself--of which you are also well aware. So, please, spare us any further steps in the Sony-can-do-no-wrong tap dance as it grows extremely tiresome and predictable.
So all that's left for them to do is to throw a temper tantrum.
Who said anything about 'Sony-can-do-no-wrong' ? I couldn't care less about Sony. I don't like the company or their products, especially the way they feature-package products in a hierarchical line up. Sony's heyday is long gone.
He was referring to me; he only cited you in the reply so you would be sure to catch his reply to my post.
Apparently I'm a Sony fanboy for pointing out a fact.
In related news, Blu-Ray and DVD invite the European Union to develop their own format, presumably called "EU Vision".
I thought that was illegal. Or is it only if they sell the same product for more at home?
Blu-Ray uber alles.
What the EU and its populations cannnot grasp is that one does not build dynamic economies by enacting 32-hour work weeks and forcing businesses to give everyone a month off in the middle of summer. The power of creativity cannot survive overwhelming handicaps on the capital investments needed to turn creativity into production. Tax burdens and a lack of an open market approach to labor dooms the EU, especially the Old Europe members, to economic ennui and decay, especially as its populations age and fewer workers must support the social programs servicing an increasing number of retirees.
Or preventing abusive license terms that strip consumers of rights and serve to eliminate competition.
They sue Microsoft for being too successful, and not freely distributing the source code.
They never asked or wanted Microsoft to distribute source code, only complete documentation so that others could interoperate with their monopoly OS and fair terms for licensing to interoperate.
how can tech companies be so smart and SO stupid at the same time.
EU ensuring they get a piece of the pie?
My understanding is that Sony wants to prohibit Blu-Ray licensees from also manufacturing HD-DVD players (including dual-format players). IMO, that sounds like a potential anti-trust situation.
That's a perfectly respectable position, but it won't get us a dual-format player.
If it comes down to a choice between one or the other, I'll pick Blu-Ray because it is the superior technology, and most of the content providers are leaning toward it as a distribution medium.
>>That's a perfectly respectable position, but it won't get us a dual-format player.<<
Exactly. And you are right that Blue Ray is the superior format.
So I just admit I'm inconsistant - if I tried to justify my desire for Sony to get forced to allow dual format drives I might say something like "for the greater good" and I'd have to call myself a socialist - well actually I'm too polite for that... but I'd think it.
The market will probably do that on its own.
The fundamental difference between DVDs and videotapes - that the competing formats are the same size, and that a dual-format solution is possible - is the only reason this won't be VHS vs. Betamax redux.
Smart engineers, dumb marketing guys. IOW, the usual.
Why is iTunes obliged to service Creative's line of players? Why does Apple have to support players made by the competition? Must Coke machines also distribute Pepsi product? Sorry, if I sell Big Macs; it's not my job to provide Whoppers on the menu too. That is the job of the competition.
Microsoft is not a monopoly. You are free (literally, in some cases) to download and run any OS you like - we have Linux, Apple, Solaris, Unix, DrDOS, JavaOS, BeOS and others. Take your pick. Why is Microsoft responsible to provide applications to the competition? Does Ford have to provide windshields, seats or stereo components for Chevy? Sorry, you are responsible only for what you make. Selling the competition's products is counter to what capitalism is. You make the best product you can, you distribute it as best as you can, you provide superior support and make your product competitively priced ... and the world will beat a path to your door.
Unless you are an American company. If I buy a Schlumberger (French company) tester; guess what? I can't put Tektronics, HP or Teradyne software/hardware upgrades. Is this unfair? No; Schlumberger makes a proprietary product; just like Microsoft and Apple. It's not Schlumberger's problem or responsibility to support the competition; nor should it be.
It shouldn't. I never said the EU doesn't sometimes go too far. But when it comes to software and the MPAA, licensing terms do go too far, stripping basic consumer rights.
Microsoft is not a monopoly.
Yes it is, convicted on both continents. But remember that a monopoly itself isn't bad or illegal, but leveraging that monopoly in an anti-competitive fashion is.
Why is Microsoft responsible to provide applications to the competition?
They are legally obligated to provide Office for the Mac due to a settlement with Apple. Although I think that might have run out by now.
Unless you are an American company.
The EU already has about a billion Euros in fines against European companies. The biggest was price fixing in the vitamin market by some very big companies you've heard of, like Hoffmann-La Roche. I believe we also fined them about half a billion dollars.
It's not Schlumberger's problem or responsibility to support the competition; nor should it be.
But if Schlumberger had a monopoly and leveraged it to force out competition, it could be in trouble and have to make amends, which usually means having to help out the competition.
Because you basically never say anything remotely critical of Europeans, just as we see here, you usually rush to their defense instead.
I am not saying they should really do this but I am saying it would be consistent with a free market. I also think new movie formats would be developed even without patents since the movie studios have enough financial interest in funding a new format specification.
So correcting ignorance is rushing to defense? Any time this antitrust stuff comes up there's someone who says it's targeted against American companies, when that is not the case.
Things like Blu-Ray need to be looked at because they have the potential to violate basic consumer and even constitutional (at least in the US) rights. Even iTunes needs a look because it may deny First Sale.
More like the way of Digital Audio Tape, and for the same reason.
I'm about freakin' tired of the EUroweenies.
>>The government could get rid of patents. Then any company could make a dual format player. Patents are government interference in the market, so either getting rid of them or forcing all patent holders to license patents would be closer to the free market than super strict patents.
I am not saying they should really do this but I am saying it would be consistent with a free market. I also think new movie formats would be developed even without patents since the movie studios have enough financial interest in funding a new format specification.<<
I've never read the theory on our patent law but I've read that our copyright law was specifically written to fill the libraries with books, not for free market purposes but to encourage people to both create and then disseminate.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.