Antitrust : la Cour rejette l’appel de Microsoft [en] 

In a case that had started in 1993 with a complaint from software company Novell about Microsoft's practice of withholding information about server protocols needed for building interoperable products, the European Commission issued a preliminary ruling in 2003, which ordered Microsoft to: 

• offer a version of Windows without Windows Media Player, and; 
• offer the information necessary for competitors on the desktop server market to have full compatibility with Windows desktops and servers.

Citing ongoing abuse by Microsoft, the Commission imposed, in March 2004, a fine of €497 million, the largest ever in the history of the EU. Microsoft paid the fine in full in July 2004, but complained at the same time to the European Court of Justice. 

On 17 September 2007, the Court of First Instance: 

• Dismissed Microsoft's complaint, with the exception of the introduction of a monitoring trustee "with the power to have access, independently of the Commission, to Microsoft's assistance, information, documents, premises and employees and to the source code of the relevant Microsoft products", the costs of which had to be borne by Microsoft. 
• Ordered Microsoft to bear 80% of its own costs as well as those of the Commission. Microsoft must also carry the full costs incurred by those companies and industry associations which supported the Commission. Associations and companies that supported Microsoft must bear their own costs.
• Ordered the Commission to pay 20% of its own costs as well as 20% of those of Microsoft. 

Commission President José Manuel Barroso said: "This judgement confirms the objectivity and the credibility of the Commission's competition policy. This policy protects the European consumer interest and ensures fair competition between businesses in the Internal Market."  

Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes stated: "The Court has upheld a landmark Commission decision to give consumers more choice in software markets. That decision set an important precedent in terms of the obligations of dominant companies to allow competition, in particular in high tech industries. The Court ruling shows that the Commission was right to take its decision. Microsoft must now comply fully with its legal obligations to desist from engaging in anti-competitive conduct. The Commission will do its utmost to ensure that Microsoft complies swiftly."

Lars Liebeler, Antitrust Counsel with the Computing Technology Industry Association (CompTIA), a pro-Microsoft Industry Alliance which supported the company in Court, said: "Today's decision by the Court of First Instance represents a significant blow to free enterprise in Europe. Rather than supporting Europe as the innovation capital of the world, unchecked, the Commission's policies may turn the EU into the litigation capital of the world. 

This decision encourages competitors to bring legal action against each other rather than compete aggressively in the marketplace. Rather than focus on fundamental principles of consumer choice and market economics, the Court has made clear that government officials will play a central role in determining the contours and direction of technology markets and the design of products in those markets even if that involvement is contrary to consumer wishes."

Ken Wasch, President of the Software and Information Industry Association (SIIA), said: "After one of the most thorough investigations in the history of competition law, spanning over seven years, the Commission has taken a steady and decisive course. From the beginning, the requirements facing Microsoft were clear. Implementing the decision is important to the software industry. We hope that, with this essential step, this will be forthcoming promptly and effectively."

Thomas Vinje, Spokesman and Legal Counsel with the European Committee for Interoperable systems (ECIS), an industry alliance of Microsoft-critical companies, which also supported the Commission's case at the European Court of Justice, said: "The time has now come for Microsoft to obey the law. No more blaming the Commission for lack of clarity, nor more excuses about complexity. The provision of interoperability information is common software industry practice. Microsoft knows full well what is required and how to provide it and now just needs to do it. 

But equally important, this landmark judgement sets a clear standard for Microsoft's future conduct, and empowers the European Commission to impose it in the European market when necessary. Moreover, the judgement is fully consistent with Court jurisprudence which since the 1970s has shown that the Commission has consistently and appropriately applied European antitrust law in IT markets to ensure fair competition based on interoperability."

Georg Greve, president of the Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE), an association of developers of Free and Open-Source Software such as the Linux operating system and the Firefox browser, said: "Microsoft can consider itself above the law no longer. Through tactics that successfully derailed antitrust processes in other parts of the world, including the United States, Microsoft has managed to postpone this day for almost a decade. But thanks to the perseverance and excellent work of the European Commission, these tactics have now failed in Europe."

Open Forum Europe commented: "OpenForum Europe welcomes this decision, and looks to the whole ICT industry to respond by taking positive steps to increase competitive choice. Open, competitive choice for the IT user can now be a reality, but users must adopt sensible purchasing measures to ensure its success. OFE analysis has in the past concluded that up to 90% of all public sector organisations may have lost their choice to deploy better or more cost effective solutions as a result of past lock-in."