European Union Competition Commissioner Joaquin Almunia
holds a news conference regarding Microsoft at the EU
Commission headquarters in Brussels. REUTERS/Eric Vidal
The European Union has fined Microsoft Corp 561 million
euros ($NZ880 million) for failing to offer users a choice of
web browser, an unprecedented sanction that will act as a
warning to other firms involved in EU antitrust disputes.
It said the U.S. software company had broken a legally
binding commitment made in 2009 to ensure that consumers had
a choice of how they access the internet, rather than
defaulting to Microsoft's Explorer browser.
An investigation found that Microsoft had failed to honour
that obligation in software issued between May 2011 and July
2012, meaning 15 million users were not given a choice.
It is the first time the European Commission, the EU's
anti-trust authority, has handed down a fine to a company for
failing to meet its obligations.
While the sanction is sizeable, representing more than 11
percent of Microsoft's expected net profit this quarter and 1
percent of annual sales, the Commission could have charged
the company up to 10 percent of annual global revenue.
Shares of the world's largest software company fell 1.3
percent to $27.98 on Nasdaq.
"If companies agree to offer commitments which then become
legally binding, they must do what they have committed to do
or face the consequences," Joaquin Almunia, the EU's
competition commissioner, told a news conference.
"I hope this decision will make companies think twice before
they even think of intentionally breaching their obligations
or even of neglecting their duty to ensure strict
compliance."
Microsoft said it took full responsibility for the incident,
which it has blamed on a technical error. The board cut chief
executive Steve Ballmer's bonus last year partly as a result,
and also faulted former Windows head Steven Sinofsky who left
the company last year for unrelated reasons.
The company did not say whether it would challenge the
ruling, but it is not expected to do so, largely so as not to
antagonise regulators.
"We have apologized for it," Microsoft said in a statement.
"We provided the Commission with a complete and candid
assessment of the situation, and we have taken steps to
strengthen our software development and other processes to
help avoid this mistake - or anything similar - in the
future."
Almunia said regulators may have made a mistake by allowing
Microsoft to police its own behaviour instead of appointing
an external trustee to ensure compliance with the
commitments.
"In 2009, we were even more naive than today," he said.
WARNING SHOT TO GOOGLE, OTHERS
Microsoft's fine is a good example of the Commission's hard
line approach towards companies which disregard rules whether
deliberately or not, said Charles Whiddington, a partner at
London-based law firm Field Fisher Waterhouse.
"The implications for companies going forward is that they
must be more rigorous in complying with any agreement with
the Commission, which does not take prisoners for
infractions," he said.
"Companies face severe sanctions for flouting EU rules, even
accidentally."
Wednesday's fine brings the total of EU fines issued against
Microsoft over the past decade to more than 2.2 billion
euros, making it the world's worst offender of EU rules.
While the charge could have been higher, it still marks a
firm sanction and will be carefully noted by the likes of
Google, which is involved in a dispute with the Commission
over how it ranks search engine results.
Google is under pressure to offer concessions to prevent the
commission moving to the next stage in the case, which could
involve fines. Other major technology firms such as Samsung
Electronics are also under investigation.
Wednesday's decision is expected to help Microsoft draw a
line under its troubles in Europe as it gears up for an
intensified battle against Google.
Microsoft is one of the complainants in the EU's
investigation into the search giant.
Almunia has also signaled EU regulators' concern over
antitrust issues in the links between technology platform
owners and application developers, in a move that could spell
trouble for Apple Inc and Google, whose iPads and Android
tablets are the leading the growth of the computer market.
Relations between the EU's antitrust body and Microsoft have
frequently been tense. In 2004, the Commission found that the
firm had abused its dominant market position by tying Windows
Media Player to the Windows software package.
In 2009, in order to resolve other competition concerns,
Microsoft undertook to offer users a browser choice screen
allowing them to download a browser other than Explorer.
The Commission made that obligation legally binding for five
years, until 2014, and initially the company complied. From
March 2010 until November 2010, 84 million browsers were
downloaded via the screen, the Commission said.
But the Windows 7 service pack 1 rolled out between mid-2011
and mid-2012 failed to offer the choice, leading to the
investigation that resulted in Wednesday's fine.
In calculating the fine, the Commission said it had taken
into account that Microsoft had cooperated by providing
information that had helped speed up the investigation.
Analysts always found it odd that Microsoft would have
purposefully failed to offer a choice of browsers via its
software given that the potential fine for such a failure
would far exceed any potential income from not offering it.
Microsoft's share of the European browser market has more
than halved since 2008 to 24 percent. Google's Chrome has a
35 percent share, followed by Mozilla's Firefox with 29
percent, according to Web traffic analysis company
StatCounter.
Given Microsoft's fading power in the browser market, some
questioned the size and point of the fine.
"As always, the regulators are late to the party," said Kim
Forrest, senior equity research analyst at Fort Pitt Capital
Group in Pittsburgh. "How did the EU come up with that figure
in damages? There are no restrictions as to being able to
place a new browser on the PC and it's really kind of clear
that Microsoft isn't benefiting monetarily from the browser
at this point."
A name, residential address, and (preferably residential) telephone number is required from readers who comment on ODT Online. These details will not be visible to site visitors.