The new plan, “Software Assurance” ties companies to a two year
maintenance agreement under which they must upgrade software every
two years. The programme attracted much criticism for incurring
large price increases. Members of the UK’s Infrastructure Forum
claimed that the new proposals amounted to an abuse of Microsoft’s
dominant position and labelled it the “Windows tax.”
Although there has been no fundamental change to the new pricing
structure, customer reaction has pushed Microsoft to give companies
extra time to adapt.
“It is in response to customer feedback,” said Microsoft
spokesman Dan Leach. “When we talked to customers about the issue,
they made it clear they needed sufficient time to examine their
existing licenses, review the improvements [in the new program] and
decide how to take advantage of the new software offering.”
Microsoft is the focus of further attention today, as a result
of a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report. The report alleges that
Microsoft is to be the subject of a huge EU fine imposed by
European antitrust enforcers. The WSJ has revealed a confidential
European investigation alleging that the company illegally used its
dominant Windows and Office software to, according to the WSJ,
“muscle into the fast-growing market for corporate and Internet
computer software, where it faces competition from Sun Microsytems
Inc. and others. It also alleges that Microsoft illegally sought to
dominate music and video software for the web.”
It is also claimed that Microsoft obstructed the European
investigation, by falsely presenting the European Commission with
34 letters from companies purporting to support its case. In many
instances, the letters had been written by Microsoft, or the
companies weren't aware they were to be used as evidence, the
Commission said.
The Commission is also said to have assailed Microsoft’s
“abusive and discriminatory” licensing policies and its refusal to
supply rivals with interface information necessary to compete.
In the US too, the conduct of the company in relation to
competition law is being questioned. The Supreme Court has rejected
Microsoft’s request to throw out a ruling that the company violated
US competition laws. In effect, Microsoft will face charges of
violating anti-trust laws in a lower court, a blow to the company
which has been attempting to get the case thrown out
altogether.
In its appeal to the Supreme Court, Microsoft had argued that
the original ruling in the case, handed down by district judge
Thomas Penfield Jackson, was tainted because of his post-trial
conduct. However, the Court upheld Judge Jackson’s ruling that
Microsoft had used illegal tactics to maintain its dominance of the
PC operating market.
