FSFE
/
fsfe-website
29
30
Fork 85
Code Issues 62 Pull Requests 14 Wiki Activity

svn path=/trunk/; revision=15173

This commit is contained in:
hugo 2010-02-22 13:29:32 +00:00
parent f19894c5bc
commit acec2c1734
1 changed files with 68 additions and 68 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

136
news/2010/news-20100222-01.en.xhtml
View File

@ -19,75 +19,75 @@
</p>
<p>
"For the first time, Microsoft has been forced to offer all users a choice
among different web browsers," says FSFE's President Karsten Gerloff. "This
is a stop sign for the company's strategy of extending its near-monopoly in
desktop operating systems to other markets."
</p>
<p>
FSFE is fighting for freedom of choice and Open Standards. Microsoft's own
Internet Explorer browsers do not interpret web standards correctly. The
company's near-monopoly on the desktop has meant that web designers have
often catered to Microsoft users only, leaving users of rival browsers to
deal with broken pages.
</p>
<p>
"Microsoft has gained its dominant position in the browser market by
violating its consent decree with the US competition authorities. The
problem we are trying to fix here wouldn't exist if Microsoft had complied
with the laws," says FSFE's Legal Counsel Carlo Piana. "It is no
coincidence that we have recently seen more competition among browsers,
after years where there was no innovation and a total lack of investment by
Microsoft."
</p>
<p>
It is now up to the users to take advantage of the choice they are offered.
Gerloff reminds the EC that it will constantly need to monitor the success
of the 'ballot screen'. "Microsoft is a convicted monopolist and has broken
countless promises in the past," he says. "We urge the European Commission
to keep a sharp eye on how well this measure plays out in practice."
</p>
<p>
The 'ballot screen' is currently limited to Europe. "We call on competition
authorities around the world to take a cue from the EC's good work in this
case. The effect on competition and standards compliance would be much
greater if users were offered a choice everywhere", says FSFE's Legal
Counsel Carlo Piana.
</p>
<p>
It remains to be seen how the 'ballot screen' will improve competition in
the market for web browsers. FSFE is equally concerned about the lack of
interoperability between Microsoft's products and Free Software
competitors, and the company's practice of bundling its operating system
with consumer hardware.
</p>
"For the first time, Microsoft has been forced to offer all users a
choice among different web browsers," says FSFE's President Karsten
Gerloff. "This is a stop sign for the company's strategy of
extending its near-monopoly in desktop operating systems to other
markets."
</p><p>
FSFE is fighting for freedom of choice and Open
Standards. Microsoft's own Internet Explorer browsers do not
interpret web standards correctly. The company's near-monopoly on
the desktop has meant that web designers have often catered to
Microsoft users only, leaving users of rival browsers to deal with
broken pages.
</p><p>
"Microsoft has gained its dominant position in the browser
market by violating its consent decree with the US competition
authorities. The problem we are trying to fix here wouldn't exist if
Microsoft had complied with the laws," says FSFE's Legal Counsel
Carlo Piana. "It is no coincidence that we have recently seen more
competition among browsers, after years where there was no
innovation and a total lack of investment by Microsoft."
</p><p>
It is now up to the users to take advantage of the choice they are
offered. Gerloff reminds the EC that it will constantly need to
monitor the success of the 'ballot screen'. "Microsoft is a
convicted monopolist and has broken countless promises in the past,"
he says. "We urge the European Commission to keep a sharp eye on how
well this measure plays out in practice."
</p><p>
The 'ballot screen' is currently limited to Europe. "We call
on competition authorities around the world to take a cue from the
EC's good work in this case. The effect on competition and standards
compliance would be much greater if users were offered a choice
everywhere", says FSFE's Legal Counsel Carlo Piana.
</p><p>
It remains to be seen how the 'ballot screen' will improve
competition in the market for web browsers. FSFE is equally
concerned about the lack of interoperability between Microsoft's
products and Free Software competitors, and the company's practice
of bundling its operating system with consumer hardware.
</p>
<h3>Background:</h3>
<p>
The initial complaint about Microsoft's abuse of its dominant
position in the web browser market was brought by Opera. FSFE has
supported the investigation as an interested third party, providing
feedback and helping to shape the measures imposed by the European
Commission.
</p><p>
The settlement on web browsers is only the latest among several
European Commission investigations into Microsoft's anticompetitive
behaviour. The most famous among these actions --
where <a href="http://fsfe.org/projects/ms-vs-eu/ms-vs-eu.en.html">FSFE
was a key player</a> -- concerned the workgroup server operating
system market. Also known as the Samba case, it ended with a
landmark decision in 2007 by the European Court of
Justice. Microsoft was forced to disclose interoperability
information that it had illegaly withheld from competitors.
</p><p>
On the same day that the ballot screen was announced, Microsoft also
promised to disclose interoperability information for a number of
its products, such as Windows Server, Microsoft Office, Exchange and
SharePoint. Here, an investigation by the European Commission is
still ongoing.
</p>
<h3>Background:</h3>
<p>
The initial complaint about Microsoft's abuse of its dominant position in
the web browser market was brought by Opera. FSFE has supported the
investigation as an interested third party, providing feedback and helping
to shape the measures imposed by the European Commission.
</p>
<p>
The settlement on web browsers is only the latest among several European
Commission investigations into Microsoft's anticompetitive behaviour. The
most famous among these actions -- where <a
href="http://fsfe.org/projects/ms-vs-eu/ms-vs-eu.en.html">FSFE was a key
player</a> -- concerned the workgroup server operating system market. Also
known as the Samba case, it ended with a landmark decision in 2007 by the
European Court of Justice. Microsoft was forced to disclose
interoperability information that it had illegaly withheld from
competitors.
</p>
<p>
On the same day that the ballot screen was announced, Microsoft also
promised to disclose interoperability information for a number of its
products, such as Windows Server, Microsoft Office, Exchange and
SharePoint. Here, an investigation by the European Commission is still
ongoing.
</p>
</body>
</html>
<!--