Legal clock ticking for Microsoft over alleged software license abuses

Microsoft has weeks to produce a multi-tenant hybrid cloud for service providers in Europe – a failure to do this or to even out alleged anti-competitive pricing for its software licenses could again put it in a legal dogfight with smaller rivals. In mid-July, Microsoft signed a Memorandum of Understanding with trade group …

[DJV]

Looks like...

...Microsoft's usual "wait it out and hope it goes away" strategy is going to come back and bite them very nicely in the bum. However, in terms of $$ it's peanuts to them, so let's hope the EU have the guts to make it hurt more than just a few peanuts for a change.

[Doctor Syntax]

Re: Looks like...

Some more wining and dining will probably be offered.

[navarac]

Re: Looks like...

The EU should add a 20% tariff (reciprocal of course) to any fines. Better still, should be 20% of annual turnover. That might make MSFT think.

[Peter Gathercole]

Re: Looks like...

All of these "% of annual global turnover" fines will never be applied, for all they are enshrined in law. They are a toothless penalty.

20% will be a very large part of the annual operating profit of any of these companies that they apply to, and if they refuse to pay it, what happens next?

Well firstly, the US Government would get involved on the behalf of any US companies, saying that they are unfair. (especially with this current administration - more tariffs, anyone?)

Secondly, they would be appealed and appealed to the very end.

If all this did not get a resolution, how would a government force a company in a different legal jurisdiction to actually pony up? The operating arm of the company in that jurisdiction would have nowhere near the value of the fines in assets that could be seized. The only weapon they have is to bankrupt and ban their operation in the country concerned, and honestly, in this case, can you see Microsoft being refused a license to sell products in Europe or the UK, bearing in mind that pretty much all of business and the governments themselves would stop dead without Windows or Azure (and don't believe that there isn't a kill switch - I'm pretty certain that they will be able to disable the Windows entitlements for any internet connected system, especially Windows 11 or later)?

[Henry Wertz 1]

Re: Looks like...

Well what... I think it was Vanuatu... did when they won some settlement in the international court against the US*, and the US had no intention of paying... they went back to the court and got legal permission to obtain $1 billion in software, music, and movies free of charge. (I was going to say 'pirate' but this was all above board although the US companies didn't like it.)

So that could be applied -- if Microsoft was fined and refused to pay, get a settllement like this and get to legal pirating and cracking.

*It was over online gambling, the US had an online gambling ban in states with casinos, state lottery, and so on. They were told 'all or nothing' (i.e. Utah has no gambling so barring online gambling there would have been OK, the mix'n'matching was fouind not to be.)

[Peter Gathercole]

Re: Looks like...

Which is all good, but if DRM gets in the way, it doesn't matter if you have a justified right to use the stuff or not.

[John Brown (no body)]

Re: Looks like...

"Secondly, they would be appealed and appealed to the very end."

Maybe it's time to increase the size of the most senior courts and just skip the middle-man when these multi-nationals are losing in the lower courts because they ALWAYS appeal to court after court after court, dragging the case out and increasing the cost to the system. If they lose and appeal, have a review of the case by senior judges and if they see little to no merit in the appeal, bump it right to the top and warn the appellant that they may face double or triple the fine if they decide to proceed.

[Medixstiff]

Re: Looks like...

Make fines payable by the Board and C level's, with the stipulation the company cannot pay the fines on their behalf.

[Alumoi]

Re: Looks like...

Let me say it again: as long as EU doesn't collect the fine, the ammount is meaningless.

[FirstTangoInParis]

(Too) simple solution?

“Different value proposition” sounds like smoke screen. Maybe it is, but surely not worth four times the price, there would have to be a boatload of bells and whistles to justify that much, and even then you could argue that functionality was just moved from Windows Server to Azure to make Server look cheaper. MS could discount a bit when running on Azure quoting “synergies” but just cut the price to realistic levels for not-Azure?