By Lucy Sheriff for The Register. This story has
been reproduced with permission.
Microsoft was ordered to make details of its protocols available
to rivals when it was found guilty of anti-competitive behaviour in
2004. Today, the commission sent Microsoft a "statement of
objections" detailing exactly why it thinks the software firm is
charging too much for access to its protocols.
In the statement, Commissioner Neelie Kroes argues that the firm
agreed the cost of access to its protocols should be determined by
how innovative they are. Now the EC says the protocols are not
innovative enough to justify the prices Microsoft is charging.
For its part, Microsoft says analysis of its proposed cost
structure carried out by PriceWaterhouseCoopers found the prices
for access to its code are "at least 30 per cent below market rate
for comparable technology". It also argued that its protocols
are innovative, and it's always been prepared to negotiate
prices with potential licensees.
In a teleconference with the press this afternoon, Brad Smith,
general counsel for Microsoft said: "We submitted a pricing
proposal to the commission in August last year and have been asking
for feedback on it since that time. We're disappointed that this
feedback is coming six months later and in this form."
He added that Microsoft has not yet received the full statement
from the commission, and has only seen the press release so far,
but that based on that he has a couple of significant concerns.
"The press release appears to suggest a new approach for price
regulation of technology. It suggests that the test of innovation
should be applied to exclusion of all others, and that only
technology that is patentable will be considered innovative. This
is a significant change in government policy."
He added that the policy was also being applied on a worldwide
basis, an approach that could cause chaos if it was taken by many
governments, as it would inevitably lead to conflicting
rulings.
The company has four weeks to formally respond to the
commission, after which it will be entitled to a hearing.
© The Register
2007
