Feeds

Microsoft makes nice before the law

It's all sweetness and light in Brussels

Internet Security Threat Report 2014

Microsoft and the European Commission's competition police are getting on like a house of fire, apparently.

They've been squabbling over some technical documentation that is supposed to tell people who write server software how to make it communicate with Microsoft's omnipresent operating system (OOS).

The idea is that Microsoft was obstructing market forces by producing documentation that is difficult to read. It's not pretty. Every time Microsoft submits another set of documentation for the EC's approval, some poor bugger has to take it home for the weekend to decide if its a good read.

Microsoft has not missed an opportunity, in the run up to its two-day hearing with the Competition Commission's OOS technical documentation for server software case team, to strut its case against the EC, which basically consists of that tiresome old technical documentation writer's cuss: RTFM.

Brad Smith, Microsoft's chief legal officer, had to stay schtum this morning on the details of the hearing. The EC did the same.

But Brad did slip out a statement about how famously the old rivals are getting along now: "We had a very constructive dialogue yesterday. In fact, I wish we could have had this type of dialogue earlier in the process."

"As we head into the second day I'm optimistic that we will be able to resolve this issue with the commission," he said.

This is a serious matter for Microsoft, because if the EC decides at the end of the hearing today (it might run over to the morning) that the OOS firm is guilty of writing turgid technical manuals it will retaliate with fines of €2m a day, backdated to 15 December.

If Microsoft maintains its belligerence in the face of Brussels law makers, the fine could be upped to as much as 5 per cent of its total word-wide revenues.

There is no magistrate, judge or jury who will decide if Microsoft is complying with its anti-trust orders. It's the EC case team that are hearing the hearing. Hence, Microsoft appears to be telling them what they want to hear.

Brad will be facing the music again later in April, at the Court of First Instance in Luxembourg this time, to present its appeal against the 2004 anti-trust ruling.®

Providing a secure and efficient Helpdesk

More from The Register

next story
Preview redux: Microsoft ships new Windows 10 build with 7,000 changes
Latest bleeding-edge bits borrow Action Center from Windows Phone
Google opens Inbox – email for people too thick to handle email
Print this article out and give it to someone tech-y if you get stuck
Microsoft promises Windows 10 will mean two-factor auth for all
Sneak peek at security features Redmond's baking into new OS
UNIX greybeards threaten Debian fork over systemd plan
'Veteran Unix Admins' fear desktop emphasis is betraying open source
Google+ goes TITSUP. But WHO knew? How long? Anyone ... Hello ...
Wobbly Gmail, Contacts, Calendar on the other hand ...
DEATH by PowerPoint: Microsoft warns of 0-day attack hidden in slides
Might put out patch in update, might chuck it out sooner
Redmond top man Satya Nadella: 'Microsoft LOVES Linux'
Open-source 'love' fairly runneth over at cloud event
prev story

Whitepapers

Cloud and hybrid-cloud data protection for VMware
Learn how quick and easy it is to configure backups and perform restores for VMware environments.
A strategic approach to identity relationship management
ForgeRock commissioned Forrester to evaluate companies’ IAM practices and requirements when it comes to customer-facing scenarios versus employee-facing ones.
High Performance for All
While HPC is not new, it has traditionally been seen as a specialist area – is it now geared up to meet more mainstream requirements?
Three 1TB solid state scorchers up for grabs
Big SSDs can be expensive but think big and think free because you could be the lucky winner of one of three 1TB Samsung SSD 840 EVO drives that we’re giving away worth over £300 apiece.
Security for virtualized datacentres
Legacy security solutions are inefficient due to the architectural differences between physical and virtual environments.