Micrisoft Vs Eu

Microsoft and the EU Commission
1. Introduction
Article 102 of the treaty of the Functioning of the European Union provides that “any abuse by one or more undertakings of a dominant position within the internal market or in a substantial part of it shall be prohibited as incompatible whit the internal market in so far as it may affect trade between member states”. In 1998, the U.S. softwaremaker Sun Microsystems submitted to the European Commission (EC) a complaint against Microsoft for abuse of dominant position performing certain activities contrary to the article 102. Microsoft is a multinational company dedicated to information technology, founded in 1975, headquartered in Redmond, Washington, USA., whose products most used are the operating systems. After a lengthyinvestigation the European Commission fined Microsoft whit a record fine of 497, 2 millions of euros, basically for two main reasons, on one hand, not to give other makers the technical information needed to make programs compatible with Windows, and secondly the Commission also condemned Microsoft's strategy to integrate into Windows the audiovisual media player, even though they were separate products,which allowed the company in only two years to become a leader in a market that then not mastered. But revealing such information would not allow their rivals to copy their programs and thus could the incentive to innovate disappear?
2. The case.

A. Chronology and development
A few years later, after the American company’s Sun Makers complaints, on 2000, the 2th February, the EuropeanCommission began an ex officio investigation, just a few days before the company launched the Windows 2000, and finally on August 3th is opened a formal procedure against Microsoft. In 2001, the 30th August the European Commission decided to extend the investigation to determine whether the integration of Windows Media Player is unlawful. On August 6, 2003, the Commission confirms that it hasevidence that Microsoft is abusing its dominant position and is sent to the company a statement of objections proposing certain solutions. Between the 12th and the 15th of November 2003 Microsoft defends itself from the EC and from the parties involved in the process in a closed hearing in Brussels.
The failure of talks between Brussels and Microsoft to reach a negotiated settlement culminated in afine of 497.2 million euros, imposed in March 2004 for abuse of its dominant position in the market for PC operating systems.
But what were the causes that led the Commission to take a decision of that nature? One hand, for the company's refusal to provide information concerning to the interoperability permitting produce programs compatible with Windows and allow their use, Moreover, the EuropeanCommission condemned Microsoft has included the audiovisual media player with the windows.
December 22 the court of first instance rejected the suspension of antitrust measures requested by Microsoft. On January 24th of 2005 Microsoft announced that it will bring the necessary information to his rivals and that it will launch an operating system without the media player program. But a fewmonths after, Microsoft sues in the court of first instance of the EU to override the decision of the commission, which requires Microsoft to share their computer protocols with their rival’s companies. On 22 December the European Commission threatens Microsoft with daily fined two million euros for failing to comply with the conditions imposed by Brussels. On January 24 was decided that Microsoft hasonly three weeks to comply with the objections raised in December by the European commission. Microsoft effectively assists companies seeking to develop programs compatible with Windows, thus avoiding the daily fine. On March 31 of 2006 Microsoft and EC concludes in a closed hearing to determine whether or not Microsoft met with the requirements imposed by the Commission in 2004. On June 27,...