Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

A Critical Appraisal of Remedies in the EU Microsoft Cases

By Nicholas Economides and Ioannis Lianos

Abstract

We discuss and compare the remedies in the two cases antitrust cases of the European Union (EU) against Microsoft. The first EU case alleged (i) that Microsoft illegally bundled the Windows Media Player (WMP) with Windows; and (ii) that Microsoft did not provide adequate documentation that would allow full interoperability between Windows servers and non-Microsoft servers as well as between Windows clients and non-Microsoft servers. After finding Microsoft liable and imposing a large fine, the EU imposed as remedies the requirements on Microsoft (i) to sell a version of Windows without WMP (Windows-N); and (ii) to publish and license interoperability information. Windows-N was a commercial failure, and there has been only limited cross-platform server entry. In its second investigation of Microsoft, the EU alleged illegal tying of Internet Explorer (IE) with Windows. The EU settled with Microsoft with Microsoft undertaking the obligation to ask (through compulsory Windows updates) consumers whose computers have Internet Explorer pre-installed to choose a browser from a menu of competing browsers. Thus, the EU imposed quite different remedies in the two cases: an unbundling remedy for the WMP but a close to a must-carry requirement for IE. We analyze and compare the different approaches

Topics: Antitrust and Trade Regulation, Computer Law, Law and Economics
Publisher: NELLCO Legal Scholarship Repository
Year: 2010
OAI identifier: oai:lsr.nellco.org:nyu_lewp-1209
Download PDF:
Sorry, we are unable to provide the full text but you may find it at the following location(s):
  • http://lsr.nellco.org/cgi/view... (external link)
  • http://lsr.nellco.org/nyu_lewp... (external link)
  • Suggested articles


    To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.