La commissaire Kroes lance un nouvel avertissement à Microsoft

Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes said: "The Commission's current view is that there is no significant innovation in these protocols. I am therefore again obliged to take formal measures to ensure that Microsoft complies with its obligations." Kroes's spokesman, Jonathan Todd, added: "In 50 years of European anti-trust policy, this is the first time that we have been confronted with a company that has failed to comply with an anti-trust decision. We are in somewhat unknown territory. We don't want to be in a situation where ten years after an anti-trust decision, they still are not in compliance."

The trustee, Professor Neil Barrett, said, on the protocols in the 'No-patent' licensing scheme: "All of the described features were considered either to have been Microsoft implementations of prior developments by others, or to have been anticipated by prior developments and to be immediately obvious minor extensions to that prior work."

Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith said: "We have worked very hard and at great length to construct the type of pricing schedule and rates that we hoped would satisfy the Commission. We submitted our most recent pricing proposal last August and have been asking for feedback on that proposal ever since. We are disappointed that it has taken six months to get this feedback and that it is being given in its present form, but if there is a silver lining, perhaps it is that we may now finally have some meetings and discussions to try to resolve this."

Simon Awde, chairman of the European Committee for Interoperable Systems, an Industry Alliance bringing together Microsoft competitors and opponents, said: "Three years on, it is increasingly evident that Microsoft is using four tactics to nullify the impact of the Commission's decision when the company does eventually comply. First, Microsoft refuses to provide complete and updated interoperability information - for which is was fined in June 2006. Today's statement of objection demonstrates that Microsoaft is also making it economically unviable for competitors to license the information to produce competing, interoperable products." ECIS added that, thirdly, Microsoft refuses to license the protocols under any terms or conditions to open-source competitors such as Linux and that fourthly, Microsoft imposes restrictive and prohibitive terms and conditions in the license."