washingtonpost.com  > Technology > Special Reports > Microsoft

E.U. Regulators Say Microsoft Had Agreed to Sanctions

Court Weighs Whether to Delay Penalties

By Jonathan Krim
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, October 1, 2004; Page E05

LUXEMBOURG, Sept. 30 -- European regulators testified here Thursday that before settlement talks with Microsoft Corp. broke down last spring, the company had agreed to antitrust sanctions that the software giant now claims would cause irreparable harm to its business and is fighting to stave off.

The testimony came on the opening day of hearings in a European court to determine whether sanctions against Microsoft for breaking Europe's antitrust laws should be put on hold pending the company's appeal, which could take years. A similar case in the United States was settled by a deal between the company and the Justice Department in late 2001.

The European Court of First Instance is conducting the hearing on sanctions ordered against Microsoft for anti-competitive business practices. (Francois Lenoir -- Reuters)

_____Microsoft Corp_____
(MSFT) Stock Quote and News
Historical Chart
Company Description
Analyst Ratings

_____More About Microsoft_____
Microsoft Crafts Backup Plan (The Washington Post, Sep 28, 2004)
Microsoft Takes Stands Against Spam, Sanctions (The Washington Post, Sep 23, 2004)
Microsoft to Share Source Code With Governments (The Washington Post, Sep 21, 2004)
Melinda Gates Joins Washington Post Co. as Director (The Washington Post, Sep 10, 2004)
Microsoft's Homeland Security Efforts (Live Online, Aug 31, 2004)
Report: Microsoft
_____Local Tech News_____
Johnson Will Retire Nov. 1 As CACI's No. 2 Executive (The Washington Post, Oct 1, 2004)
After the Big Drop (The Washington Post, Oct 1, 2004)
Corvis Will Change Name To Broadwing (The Washington Post, Sep 29, 2004)
More Headlines
Tech Events Calendar

Microsoft also attempted to reach agreement with European regulators to resolve their antitrust concerns. At one point, the company indicated it was willing to license technical data to rivals to help ensure that their network software would work with Microsoft's, according to testimony by Cecilio Madero, a staff director with the European Commission's competition bureau.

The agreement fell through and European authorities ultimately ordered such disclosure in April, after finding that Microsoft was using its overwhelming Windows dominance to muscle into the market for server software, which is used to run computer networks. By withholding certain code needed for such "workgroup server" systems to communicate with desktop machines running Windows, the commission found, Microsoft was able to hobble its server rivals.

Microsoft's tentative acceptance of a licensing agreement prompted close questioning from Bo Vesterdorf, president of the European Union's Court of First Instance, which is holding the hearings that are scheduled to continue Friday.

One of the criteria for postponing such orders is whether they would cause a company irreparable damage, a position Microsoft continued to press today. Its lead attorney, Ian S. Forrester, said giving rivals such software information would also hand them the keys to broader Microsoft technology in which it has invested heavily.

Bradford L. Smith, Microsoft's general counsel, told Vesterdorf that even had the company settled the European case, the disclosure of data would have hurt Microsoft. "But in agreeing to irreparable harm, one gets other things," such as more control over the terms of the deal, Smith said.

The testimony followed a statement by Smith earlier this week that the company was preparing a version of Windows without media-playing capability, the other major sanction imposed by the European Commission, in the event it loses the case. Previously, the company had said that doing so would render Windows unable to function properly.

For Microsoft, the battle is larger than the individual penalties, or the roughly $600 million fine ordered by the commission that the company could easily pay from its nearly $60 billion in cash.

The company is seeking to ensure that no regulator anywhere unilaterally controls the inner workings of the software business, either how products are designed or how widely technology is distributed.

CONTINUED    1 2    Next >

© 2004 The Washington Post Company