Why Hold a Hearing in the EU if Key Decision Makers are Unable to Attend?

By | May 21, 2009 | 5 Comments


Why Hold a Hearing in the EU if Key Decision Makers are Unable to Attend?Dave Heiner writes:

For as long as I’ve been at Microsoft (since 1994), there has always been keen interest in the antitrust issues raised by the success of Windows.

Interest peaked after we included a Web browser in Windows 95. That design choice led to the U.S. government case against Microsoft, which was resolved in 2002 with a consent decree and court rulings designed to promote competitive opportunities for browser vendors. Today Microsoft’s integration of the browser into Windows is regulated by these rulings, and computer users can choose Internet Explorer, Mozilla Firefox, Apple Safari, Google Chrome, Opera or other browsers that run on Windows.

Continue reading at Microsofontheissues.com


About (Author Profile)


Vygantas is a former web designer whose projects are used by companies such as AMD, NVIDIA and departed Westood Studios. Being passionate about software, Vygantas began his journalism career back in 2007 when he founded FavBrowser.com. Having said that, he is also an adrenaline junkie who enjoys good books, fitness activities and Forex trading.

  • gr8 stuff

    Looks like Microsoft is lying again!

    http://www.marketwatch.com/story/microsoft-europe-regulator-in-scheduling-dust-up

    Thomas Vinje, a Brussels-based attorney representing ECIS, criticized Microsoft’s argument about scheduling conflicts, saying the company simply “got cold feet.”

    Vinje said that even if European Commission officials were in Brussels at the time of the hearing, they most likely would not attend anyway. “Such people simply don’t attend such hearings, and Microsoft knows it,” Vinje said. “Hearings are always attended by staff level officials, not senior ones.”

  • gr8 stuff

    Come on. Design choice? Not a design choice, just a conscious strategy to destrou Netscape.

    This comment in the blog says it all:

    Why is it that not even Microsoft officials can get their facts straight when reporting on this case? The case is not primarily about bundling IE with Windows, it is about the practice of making it a mandatory integral PART of Windows, explicitly forbidding OEM vendors to ship systems with any other browser pre-installed, and about the well-founded suspicion that Microsoft used its dominance in the OS market to subvert and fragment various Web standards (HTML, ECMAScript, Java) and create huge problems for competitors by making Internet Explorer incompatible with everything else and thus maintain its market share by anti-competitive practices.

  • prapi

    It’s amazing that FavBrowser once again acts as the Microsoft lap-dog, mindlessly repeating their obvious propaganda.

    • http://www.favbrowser.com Vygantas Lipskas

      According to DailyTech

      Microsoft insists the snub of the EC’s hearing is unintentional — it says it can’t make it because it has to attend the Zurich, Switzerland, meeting of the International Competition Network — which it calls “the most important worldwide intergovernmental competition law meeting.” Dave Heiner, VP and deputy general counsel for Microsoft states, “As a result, it appears that many of the most influential commission and national competition officials with the greatest interest in our case will be in Zurich and so unable to attend our hearing in Brussels.”

      A request for reschedule by Microsoft was denied. The EC said the availability of rooms in the courthouse made it impossible to reschedule. Microsoft offered to find an alternate room, but the EC rejected this proposal.

      http://www.dailytech.com/Microsoft+Declines+EU+Oral+Hearing+Invite+Adds+Kill+Switch+to+IE+8+in+Windows+7/article15215.htm

      • prapi

        “According to DailyTech”

        My point exactly.

        You are mindlessly repeating Microsoft’s claims, ignoring the facts:

        http://www.marketwatch.com/story/microsoft-europe-regulator-in-scheduling-dust-up

        Vinje said that even if European Commission officials were in Brussels at the time of the hearing, they most likely would not attend anyway. “Such people simply don’t attend such hearings, and Microsoft knows it,” Vinje said. “Hearings are always attended by staff level officials, not senior ones.”

        Also, the competition commissioner is attending, which is about as senior as you can get.

        So Microsoft is lying. They know those higher-ups wouldn’t attend anyway.