EU's Microsoft Move Could Set
Precedent
Tech Landscape Could Be Transformed If U.S. Giant Is Made to Ditch Bundling
By Brandon Mitchener in Brussels and Don Clark in
San Francisco
8th August 2003

Europe's latest salvo against Microsoft Corp.
in a four-year-old antitrust case against the software giant raises the
stakes in a newer, potentially more damaging case just getting under way.
Both cases take issue with a practice, called bundling, that industry
officials have long considered a sacred cow for Microsoft. The Redmond,
Washington, company makes life easier for consumers by pre-installing or
"bundling" programs such as Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player with
the Windows software found on most new PCs. That way, consumers don't have
to install the programs themselves -- unless they want to use competing
software for browsing the Web or playing digital music and videos.
Competitors say it is impossible to compete against something so ubiquitous,
not to mention free.
If European antitrust regulators force Microsoft to "un-bundle" Media Player
from current and future versions of Windows, as the European Commission
threatened Wednesday, lawyers on both sides of the issue agree it may set a
precedent that could also allow European regulators to prevent the company
from bundling other new services, such as potentially lucrative software for
instant messaging, photo editing, voice recognition and digital sales of
music and videos.
To be sure, no one is challenging Microsoft's ability to bundle programs in
its Office suite of programs -- Word, Excel and PowerPoint -- as a software
package. Moreover, in many key markets Microsoft has built such a dominant
market position that an adverse regulatory ruling may have little long-term
effect on the company.
Still, bundling remains a controversial issue when the practice is applied
to Windows, because Microsoft critics charge that most consumers have no
real alternative.
"Bundling is the key weapon in Microsoft's competitive arsenal," says Thomas
Vinje, a Brussels-based lawyer for Morrison & Foerster LLP. "If they're
forced to abandon that weapon then the competitive landscape really will
change." Mr. Vinje represents Microsoft competitors including Nokia Corp.
and AOL Time Warner Inc. behind the new complaint lodged with the European
Commission in February.
A Microsoft spokesman had no immediate comment on the prospect of a bundling
ruling, though the company has said it intends to work with the commission,
the main regulatory agency in the European Union, to resolve its concerns.
Microsoft has repeatedly resisted attempts to force it to un-bundle Windows
features both in Europe and the United States, where the U.S. Department of
Justice tried and failed to force Microsoft to sell a version of Windows
without Internet Explorer, its Web browser. Company officials have said they
will fight the latest assault by the commission, the chief antitrust
authority in the European Union, with the same vigor.
"We have to look at it in light of the precedent it may set in preventing
the company from continuing to innovate," said one Microsoft official. "Our
main concern is once you say yes to Media Player you have to say 'What does
that mean for every other innovation you have to add to [Windows] in the
future?' "
Weighing in on a case that dates back to a December 1998 complaint by Sun
Microsystems Inc., the commission said Wednesday that Microsoft should
un-bundle Windows Media Player from current and future versions of Windows,
effectively forcing the company to sell a stripped-down version of its
operating system that's at least as attractive to customers as the full
version. Alternatively, the commission said Microsoft could bundle
competitors' products in the media-player software market -- something some
legal experts and industry executives think it is most likely.
The commission's threatened remedies, which Microsoft now has an opportunity
to respond to before the EU regulators act, elated Mr. Vinje because it
bolsters the case he helped put together for the Washington, D.C.-based
Computer and Communications Industry Association regarding alleged antitrust
abuses linked to Windows XP, the latest incarnation of Windows. "This
indicates to me that the decision has really been taken at the highest level
to go to the end of the game and to pursue aggressively a robust, meaningful
remedy and not to give up until they've gotten it," Mr. Vinje said.
Besides PC operating systems and applications software, CCIA's complaint
notes a host of newer markets that Microsoft's bundling activity could
affect, including Internet portals and Internet advertising, as well as
software for hand-held computing devices, smart phones, videogame systems
and TV set-top boxes.
The CCIA complaint listed Internet Explorer, Outlook Express, Windows Media
Player, Windows Messenger and Windows Movie Maker 2 as features bundled with
Windows XP that thwarted other companies' ability to sell similar products
for a profit. The complaint also alleges that Microsoft is trying to
leverage its monopoly in desktop PC operating systems into a similar
position in the markets for software for cable set-top boxes, hand-held
computers and mobile phones.
The commission's investigation of the second complaint has yet to really
begin, as regulators say they have their hands full with the older case.
Some lawyers say the longstanding EU investigation regarding Media Player
and other competition issues could be a harbinger for a bigger battle to
come -- one in which Microsoft could be the underdog. "If the upcoming
decision is a proxy for the real battle, un-bundling of Media Player bodes
poorly for Microsoft," said Chris Bright, an antitrust partner at law firm
Shearman & Sterling in London.
But Nicholas Economides, professor of economics at the Stern School of
Business at New York University and an authority on antitrust policy, said
an un-bundling order in the first case wouldn't necessarily portend the same
for the second case. "Each case has to be seen on its own merits, and
whether a particular case has benefits to consumers," he said.
The second case also raises questions for how other large tech players
operate. "Where do you stop?" Bundeep Singh Rangar, chief operating officer
at London venture capital firm Ariadne Capital, asks rhetorically. Mr.
Rangar says he would like to see a solution to that question but believes
the best technology that has the highest market acceptance eventually
triumphs, whether it is bundled or not.
The allegation that Microsoft illegally ties new products to its monopoly
operating systems was a key issue in the Justice Department's antitrust case
in the U.S. The agency, and Microsoft's rivals, alleged that the company
bundled the Internet Explorer browser with Windows as an anticompetitive act
designed to hurt rival Netscape Communications. Microsoft defended the
integration of new products as a vital principle that it needs to improve
its products, carrying huge benefits to consumers.
A binding precedent on the issue was never established. The Justice
Department agreed to a settlement in November 2001 that allowed Microsoft to
keep bundling its browser with Windows, as long as it allowed computer
makers to disable it.
A key problem, for Microsoft rivals, is the long time delay between the time
a case is filed and any potential remedy. In many key markets, including Web
browsers, server software and media-player software, Microsoft has already
established a dominant position. Though an EU ruling could theoretically
stop bundling of some products from continuing, such restrictions wouldn't
necessarily reverse gains Microsoft had already made.
Ronald Katz, a Silicon Valley antitrust lawyer who has monitored the
company's antitrust battles, doesn't see how the EU actions would greatly
help Sun or other existing competitors. "Microsoft is so far ahead," he
says. "The successor to Microsoft is somebody that is just being born
today."
But the media-player market, at least, is still a battle, with RealNetworks
and Microsoft still fighting it out for leadership. "If you take a case like
the browser, it's too late," said Steven Salop, a professor of economics and
law at the Georgetown University law center in Washington, D.C., who has
been a consultant to Microsoft's opponents. "What is significant about the
media player is that the time is now -- the market is in a position where
its about to tip toward Windows Media Player, but there might still be time
to interdict it," he said.
-- James Kanter and Kevin Delaney contributed to this article.
|
|