Judge Questions Plans for Microsoft
LUXEMBOURG -- A skeptical European judge on Friday quizzed antitrust enforcers on whether forcing Microsoft Corp. to remove its Media Player from the ubiquitous Windows operating system would needlessly complicate life for the software giant’s customers.
European Court of First Instance President Bo Vesterdorf appeared puzzled by the European Commission’s March directive that Microsoft offer a version of Windows without Media Player, a program for playing audio and video clips.
“This remedy might have an extremely limited effect, in reality,” Vesterdorf said during the final day of a hearing to determine whether sanctions against Microsoft will be suspended while the company appeals.
The European Commission ruled in March that Microsoft unfairly used its dominance in PC software to muscle competitors in audio and video software and in the market for server computers that power networks.
In addition to selling a version of Windows without Media Player, Microsoft was ordered to pay more than $600 million and to reveal more about how its programs work. They are the toughest sanctions imposed on the world’s biggest software maker, which has battled antitrust claims for years.
The European case, the largest remaining known legal hurdle Microsoft faces, is particularly important because it goes to the heart of the company’s strategy of adding new products to Windows.
If the Court of First Instance and the highest European court, the Court of Justice, agree that Microsoft broke the law by tying the media player to Windows, officials might try to stop Microsoft from incorporating a search engine and other major components.
Vesterdorf speculated that one of the few practical effects of removing the Media Player and related files would be that visitors to websites offering content only in Microsoft’s format wouldn’t be able to hear or watch it -- something the Danish judge said “seems slightly strange.”
Commission attorneys responded that they didn’t expect customers to buy stripped-down computers, but believed makers of the machines would be obliged to reinstall the Microsoft player or pick a rival offering from such firms as RealNetworks Inc. and Apple Computer Inc.
That enforced choice, said commission lawyer Per Hellstrom, should cut into the unfair advantage Microsoft enjoys by bundling its player on about 95% of new PCs sold in the world. He said that practice illegally leveraged Microsoft’s Windows monopoly, “forecloses competition and stifles innovation.”
The commission order “has the potential to break the ubiquity of the Windows Media Player,” Hellstrom said.
Microsoft has increased its share of the market to about 60%, while Real and Apple have lost ground.
Although the judge’s comments don’t mean that he will grant Microsoft’s request for a temporary stay, they buoyed the spirits of the company’s lawyers.
Those attorneys had faced their own tough questioning in Thursday’s proceedings about forcing the company to divulge how its PC software interacts with programs controlling networks of machines.
Near the end of Friday’s hearing, Microsoft General Counsel Brad Smith quipped, “That was two of the more enjoyable hours I’ve spent in a courtroom.”
Vesterdorf is expected to rule on the sanctions within two months.
