Microsoft lost a significant appeals case in Europe today. As result, they will have to pay a 665.4 million dollar fine, and share information about server protocols that had previously not been disclosed. The New York Times added: "Under the ruling, Microsoft must sell to computer makers a version of Windows without its Media Player software for playing music, movies and video clips sent over the Internet on personal computers."
I have not conducted a serious examination of this case, but it does seem to me to be interesting. It also touches on various subjects such as the rights of companies vs the rights of individuals, antitrust legislation, the free market, etc. As an avid supporter of the free market, I would be interested in hearing other CodeFezzers opinions on this legislation.
- What do you think is the import of this case? Will it affect Microsoft, or is it a non-serious issue for them? Does it enhance or restrict the rights of individuals?
- Does Microsoft deserve the verdict, or is it unfair? They have paid billions of dollars to other competitors in antitrust cases settled out of court this year. Are they getting off cheap with a $665 million dollar fine? Is the fine itself unfair?
- I have heard, and it appears to be true, that the Windows Media Player cannot be uninstalled. Should users have the right to uninstall software like that, or should Microsoft have the right to omit the uninstall feature?
- Is this case really about something else, or is the verdict focusing on the correct issues?
- Are there common misconceptions about this case?
We want to hear from you. What do you think about this case?