Microsoft Faces $618m Fine In Eu Case

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>+24 March 2004 - 21:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (<TROUBLE^MAKER> @ 24 March 2004 - 21:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by jobauer@24 March 2004 - 12:55
<!--QuoteBegin-<TROUBLE^MAKER>

@24 March 2004 - 14:45
If MS refuses the demands all the EU can do is pull MS&#39;s products from the market

Well, don&#39;t you see it&#39;s a huge decision already ?

Who talked about extradition of Bill Gates and Co ? The UE sure can&#39;t, and doesn&#39;t want that. Still, if you&#39;re a company and you&#39;re fordidden to sell your products (and I remind you we haven&#39;t reach that point yet, and probably never will), it&#39;s a BIG problem...

In the USA if someone refuses a court order they are arrested, so if the EU court said cough up 600 million and they refused an arrest is about the only recourse possible besides seizing money assets but there in the USA. [/b][/quote]
Who would they arrest, the fine will be on the body corporate.

[shn]

To M&#036; it really does not matter as much.

Consumers will make up for any lose revenue when they buy a pre-built pc with pre-bundled software.

For most "typical" consumers they have no choice but to fatten the pockets of M&#036; because even if they never bought any M&#036; product again M&#036; still makes money from pre bundled software on crappy new computers that most of you buy.

Btw, my pc was pre-built (sorda)...........but the only pre-bundled software it came with was Red Hat Linux AS 2.1.

I think it&#39;s better for most people to just face the fact the M&#036; 0wns you. And do not waste too much time concerning yourself with their revenue because you will never see any of it in your hands................ and you can take that to the bank.

[<TROUBLE^MAKER>]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+24 March 2004 - 15:42--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol @ 24 March 2004 - 15:42)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>@24 March 2004 - 21:02

Originally posted by jobauer@24 March 2004 - 12:55
<!--QuoteBegin-<TROUBLE^MAKER>

@24 March 2004 - 14:45
If MS refuses the demands all the EU can do is pull MS&#39;s products from the market

Well, don&#39;t you see it&#39;s a huge decision already ?

Who talked about extradition of Bill Gates and Co ? The UE sure can&#39;t, and doesn&#39;t want that. Still, if you&#39;re a company and you&#39;re fordidden to sell your products (and I remind you we haven&#39;t reach that point yet, and probably never will), it&#39;s a BIG problem...

In the USA if someone refuses a court order they are arrested, so if the EU court said cough up 600 million and they refused an arrest is about the only recourse possible besides seizing money assets but there in the USA.

Who would they arrest, the fine will be on the body corporate. [/b][/quote]
Since Corporations don&#39;t have a brain or any other means of self determination, a board of directors are appointed to take responsibility with full knowledge that they are personally responsible for it&#39;s actions. When your in court the board of directors play the role of guardian, similar to a parent being responsible for there child when it comes to civil suits. If MS refused to pay 600 million that would be viewed as an action of the board members so the directors would be charged with contempt of court and obstruction of the justice.

I never mentioned Bill Gates in my posts.

[J'Pol]

Neither did I mention Mr Gates, I am not aware if he is a director, only that he is a major shareholder. Didn&#39;t he resign as CEO a short while ago.

Which particular legal system / jurisdiction are you describing when you use this "guardian" analogy.

[Illuminati]

Fact is the fine doesn&#39;t mean much to Microsoft - It might be a lot to the EU and hopefully will go towards a few more projects on developing the Union (UK included I hope), but a company who&#39;s founding businessman is reputed to have enough wealth to buy a country is unlikely to be affected by an amount that big.

What will hurt Microsoft is the other actions - MS may (depends on the appeal) may to share parts of the code with competitors, MS may have to ship (at least in Europe) a version of Windows without any integrated media players, MS has offered the EU a compromise on where it will allow the feature for three selected media players to be shipped in Windows globally (i.e. not just in Europe)...the list goes on, but none of it is finalised until the EU gives the final action. However, one thing can be said - the EU&#39;s case against Microsoft affects Windows across the world, not just in Europe.

And some people say the Europeans don&#39;t do anything right

As for what might happen to small businesses if MS withdraws from Europe - There&#39;s very few other OSs that businesses might consider if you think about it. Apple Macs may be an option but the large costs in buying the hardware and the software will mean it&#39;d only really be for the professional/yuppie businesses. OS/2 might be an alternative but chances are that the businesses may go for a distro of Linux due to the popularity & support for it recently.

[<TROUBLE^MAKER>]

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol+24 March 2004 - 18:21--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (J&#39;Pol &#064; 24 March 2004 - 18:21)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> Neither did I mention Mr Gates, I am not aware if he is a director, only that he is a major shareholder. Didn&#39;t he resign as CEO a short while ago.

[/b]

Originally posted by jobauer@24 March 2004 - 12:55

Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>@24 March 2004 - 14:45
If MS refuses the demands all the EU can do is pull MS&#39;s products from the market

Well, don&#39;t you see it&#39;s a huge decision already ?

Who talked about extradition of Bill Gates and Co ? The UE sure can&#39;t, and doesn&#39;t want that. Still, if you&#39;re a company and you&#39;re fordidden to sell your products (and I remind you we haven&#39;t reach that point yet, and probably never will), it&#39;s a BIG problem...

<!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@24 March 2004 - 18:21

Which particular legal system / jurisdiction are you describing when you use this "guardian" analogy. [/quote]



The USA and Canada


Should a corporation be treated as capable of committing a crime? Canada and other common law jurisdictions have answered this question with a clear "Yes". Under our Criminal Code, a "person" is defined, in section 2, to include "public bodies, bodies corporate, societies, [and] companies…" A corporation, therefore, is a person and may be held responsible for a crime.

Corporations, however, can only act through the people they employ and the law must look to the actions of individuals -- particularly those in charge of the company -- in order to determine the criminal liability of the corporation itself. It is this attribution of liability to the corporate entity that provides the focal point for the development of the law.

Within common law jurisdictions, several broad, and quite different, models have evolved. These include: the identification model, the longstanding approach in Canada and the United Kingdom; vicarious liability, still the premise for liability in the United States; and, the corporate culture model adopted most prominently in Australia.

In May 2000, the Home Office issued proposals

http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/cc...troduction.html


http://www.tdc.ca/liable.htm

http://www.mycorporation.com/corpdirecto.htm

[shn]

Originally posted by Illuminati@24 March 2004 - 17:34
Fact is the fine doesn&#39;t mean much to Microsoft - It might be a lot to the EU and hopefully will go towards a few more projects on developing the Union (UK included I hope), but a company who&#39;s founding businessman is reputed to have enough wealth to buy a country is unlikely to be affected by an amount that big.&nbsp;

What will hurt Microsoft is the other actions - MS may (depends on the appeal) may to share parts of the code with competitors, MS may have to ship (at least in Europe) a version of Windows without any integrated media players, MS has offered the EU a compromise on where it will allow the feature for three selected media players to be shipped in Windows globally (i.e. not just in Europe)...the list goes on, but none of it is finalised until the EU gives the final action.&nbsp; However, one thing can be said - the EU&#39;s case against Microsoft affects Windows across the world, not just in Europe.&nbsp;

And some people say the Europeans don&#39;t do anything right

As for what might happen to small businesses if MS withdraws from Europe - There&#39;s very few other OSs that businesses might consider if you think about it.&nbsp; Apple Macs may be an option but the large costs in buying the hardware and the software will mean it&#39;d only really be for the professional/yuppie businesses.&nbsp; OS/2 might be an alternative but chances are that the businesses may go for a distro of Linux due to the popularity & support for it recently.

Why don&#39;t you change that Red Hat Fedora link in your sig to Lindows

Fedora is not a replacement for Windows, then again neither is Lindows.

minesweeper........argh&#33;
minesweeper.....argh&#33;&#33;
minesweeper + Unix/X solitaire games based on the ones available for Windows™....................................ARGH&#33;&#33;&#33;

[jobauer]

Originally posted by Illuminati@24 March 2004 - 23:34
What will hurt Microsoft is the other actions - MS may (depends on the appeal) may to share parts of the code with competitors, MS may have to ship (at least in Europe) a version of Windows without any integrated media players, MS has offered the EU a compromise on where it will allow the feature for three selected media players to be shipped in Windows globally (i.e. not just in Europe)...the list goes on, but none of it is finalised until the EU gives the final action.&nbsp; However, one thing can be said - the EU&#39;s case against Microsoft affects Windows across the world, not just in Europe.

I agree with that. That&#39;s actually what I tried to point out in my first post

And yes, the UE is a huge market, which MS can&#39;t afford to lose

[<TROUBLE^MAKER>]

Originally posted by jobauer+24 March 2004 - 19:02--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (jobauer @ 24 March 2004 - 19:02)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'> <!--QuoteBegin-Illuminati@24 March 2004 - 23:34
What will hurt Microsoft is the other actions - MS may (depends on the appeal) may to share parts of the code with competitors, MS may have to ship (at least in Europe) a version of Windows without any integrated media players, MS has offered the EU a compromise on where it will allow the feature for three selected media players to be shipped in Windows globally (i.e. not just in Europe)...the list goes on, but none of it is finalised until the EU gives the final action.&nbsp; However, one thing can be said - the EU&#39;s case against Microsoft affects Windows across the world, not just in Europe.

I agree with that. That&#39;s actually what I tried to point out in my first post

And yes, the UE is a huge market, wich MS can&#39;t afford to lose [/b][/quote]
http://www.digital-law-online.com/misc/ogilvie.htm

http://stlr.stanford.edu/STLR/Articl..._4/article.htm

[J'Pol]

Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>+25 March 2004 - 00:49--></div><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td>QUOTE (<TROUBLE^MAKER> &#064; 25 March 2004 - 00:49)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'>

Originally posted by J&#39;Pol@24 March 2004 - 18:21
Neither did I mention Mr Gates, I am not aware if he is a director, only that he is a major shareholder. Didn&#39;t he resign as CEO a short while ago.

Originally posted by jobauer@24 March 2004 - 12:55

Originally posted by <TROUBLE^MAKER>@24 March 2004 - 14:45
If MS refuses the demands all the EU can do is pull MS&#39;s products from the market

Well, don&#39;t you see it&#39;s a huge decision already ?

Who talked about extradition of Bill Gates and Co ? The UE sure can&#39;t, and doesn&#39;t want that. Still, if you&#39;re a company and you&#39;re fordidden to sell your products (and I remind you we haven&#39;t reach that point yet, and probably never will), it&#39;s a BIG problem...

<!--QuoteBegin-J&#39;Pol@24 March 2004 - 18:21

Which particular legal system / jurisdiction are you describing when you use this "guardian" analogy.

The USA and Canada


Should a corporation be treated as capable of committing a crime? Canada and other common law jurisdictions have answered this question with a clear "Yes". Under our Criminal Code, a "person" is defined, in section 2, to include "public bodies, bodies corporate, societies, [and] companies…" A corporation, therefore, is a person and may be held responsible for a crime.

Corporations, however, can only act through the people they employ and the law must look to the actions of individuals -- particularly those in charge of the company -- in order to determine the criminal liability of the corporation itself. It is this attribution of liability to the corporate entity that provides the focal point for the development of the law.

Within common law jurisdictions, several broad, and quite different, models have evolved. These include: the identification model, the longstanding approach in Canada and the United Kingdom; vicarious liability, still the premise for liability in the United States; and, the corporate culture model adopted most prominently in Australia.

In May 2000, the Home Office issued proposals

http://canada.justice.gc.ca/en/dept/pub/cc...troduction.html


http://www.tdc.ca/liable.htm

http://www.mycorporation.com/corpdirecto.htm [/b][/quote]


And what pray tell do the legal systems of the USA and Canada have to do with the EU.