Microsoft Investors Finally Get a Good Deal from EU Regulators

In reading about the almost Microsoft (MSFT) agreement with the European Union (EU) announced October 7, I feel Microsoft investors have finally gotten a good deal from the EU regulators. The mounting opposition to the deal is my proof-point. Just as the Opera (OPESF.PK) company executives that started the anti-Microsoft browser complaint in EU now feel chained to an EU Competition Commission (EUCC) boat anchor being thrown overboard by Neelie Kroes' abandoning ship, Free Software Foundation Europe (FSFE) executives are also worried by what looks like a done-deal agreement between Kroes and Steve Ballmer.

The oddly named European Committee for Interoperable Systems (ECIS) is supposedly against it but has not posted a formal statement. [It's oddly named in that the leading members of the "European Committee" appear to be the North-American-domiciled corporations Adobe (ADBE), Corel, IBM, Oracle (ORCL), Real Networks, Red Hat (RHT) and Sun (JAVA).]

The FSFE and ECIS, rightly so, seem more concerned about the interoperability part of the agreement than the trivial "browser ballot" bologna. On September 28, Karsten Gerloff—FSFE President—wrote in a blog:

“We are concerned that the Commission may end up reversing years of successful antitrust work if Neelie Kroes settles for far too little in order to close a deal, any deal. That would mean that Europeans remain stuck with the present Microsoft monopoly in most areas of the desktop. Even worse, that monopoly would have the Commission’s official seal of approval, effectively ruining many years of outstanding work by Ms Kroes and her team.”

“Of the desktop” is the key phrase in Mr. Gerloff’s complaint. Microsoft no longer cares about the desktop. It’s just a cash cow it will milk as long as it can. Technologically and from a business model perspective, Microsoft has moved on, while the EUCC, ECIS and FSFE continue to look backward.

At least the FSFE--looking backward--has a hint that something’s about to hit it in the back of the head. On October 6 (apparently after the story of the impending Microsoft-EUCC deal began to spread), Gerloff wrote Kroes in an open letter saying:

“Microsoft must be required to provide interoperability information either royalty-free or in return for a one-time payment. Running royalties are incompatible with Free Software. The PFIF agreement, which resulted from the Samba case, provides a tested and working instance of such an agreement.
“Microsoft must provide a legally binding assurance that it will not assert those of its patents which relate to the interoperability information against Free Software. The lack of such assurance would let the company use Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) to discourage competitors from making use of the interoperability information, leaving the remedy ineffective.”

On October 8, the FSFE posted an even more strident complaint to the EUCC. With all guns blazing, it says,

"There is no clear commitment from Microsoft to adhere to web standards in the future, nor to end the company's habit of adding proprietary extensions to standards."

Bingo, the FSFE is on to something even though it does not appear to know what it is. Microsoft is totally willing to let the European Free Softies re-invent all the desktop spreadsheet and word processors they want, and let them waste even more cycles, making their “free” spreadsheet and word processors work with deskbound Word and Excel if they want.

While the FSFE and the EUCC are worrying about 20th century technologies, Microsoft is moving on to augmented reality that makes browsers prehistoric, clouds that make permissive licenses and desktop applications irrelevant, and new (or repurposed Entertainment and Device Division) hybrid consumer/enterprise products that bundle software down in the silicon, where the FSFE cannot find it to re-invent it.

While the FSFE and EUCC are worrying about standards, no one in the industry cares about (including all the Microsoft competitors that pay lip service to the ECIS), Microsoft is not only not promising to adhere to any standards, Microsoft is making all these standards irrelevant. Steve Ballmer explained why and how this works at his July 2009 Microsoft Financial Analyst presentation (see second bullet).

Comments

[jack dee:]

umm, of course competitors are crying, they always do.

They have everything to gain and nothing to lose by asking for more, its always the same, as soon as the deal comes in the complainers start to cry some more. It matters not who is involved.

Oct 09 12:30 PM

[Josh B Thom...:]

Has note the "behind the times" always been an issue with this legal issue? It would appear the desktop is no longer the center of playing field.

Oct 09 12:35 PM