Internet Explorer being sued

[tech_support]

Microsoft has once more come under fire for allegedly anti-competitive behaviour - this time from software rival Opera. The Norwegian company, which makes an internet browser of the same name, has filed a complaint with European Union officials accusing Microsoft of stifling competition. Opera, which has around 12 million users worldwide, said today that Microsoft had been acting anti-competitively by bundling its Internet Explorer program with the Windows operating system. “We are filing this complaint on behalf of all consumers who are tired of having a monopolist make choices for them,” said Jon von Tetzchner, the chief executive of Opera. “We cannot rest until we’ve brought fair and equitable options to consumers worldwide.”

The company said it was looking for a series of measures from European officials, including forcing Microsoft to unbundle Internet Explorer or allowing rival products to be preinstalled in Windows, and compelling Microsoft to follow design guidelines issued by web standards groups. “Computer users have complete freedom of choice to use and set as default any browser they wish,” the company said in a statement. Last year the EU fined Microsoft a record €280m in a similar antitrust battle over its Windows Media Player software. Opera’s claims are closely modeled on the high-profile case against Microsoft pursued by the US government in a six-year battle over the integration of Internet Explorer into the Windows operating system. I’m slowly getting tired of all these “best browser” debates and counteractions of competitive companies…

Go Opera.. Go Opera... Go Go... Go Opera!

[insanemonkey]

I think this is so funny becuase opera is sueing them just cuase they put IE on there software, why does opera not make there own operating machine, why isnt firefox sueing them?

also I mean users can if they do not want to use IE they are allowed to goto another site and just download a different browser, I so think they are going to lose... please if opera wins then this means so many cases would be in court and this would be just rediculous....

I mean like I dont care using IE cuase i have never problems, I just want to say website look like crap in other browsers compared to IE, I think this is just outragously stupid, sueing over putting a browser on a system made by microsoft, who cares!!!

i mean you keep sueing microsoft they are just going to find another way around this... if people want a certain browser on there pc then go download it... Its just more space thats going to take up on there pc's opera is stupid..

[jscheuer1]

You pretty much have to have a browser. What browser should MS bundle? I think the fairest method would be to - when you first boot up a new system, give the user the choice of all available browsers for that OS. But, this might not be all that feasible, then again, why not? As long as the browsers are free and the companies that offer them make available mirrors for their on demand download and installation via the net, it could work for users already online, with an option to decide later, once you are online.

However, I think this isn't exactly what the Opera suit is about, though I'd love to think it is. I think this is Opera looking for a way to make a few bucks - more than a few bucks.

I say this though as an avid Opera user, and I wish them well.

[BLiZZaRD]

I think the whole thing is ridiculous. When you have it people come after it. That is basically what MS is dealing with. They have it (be it dollars or people using their stuff, etc.) and everyone else wants it. I thought the media player one was stupid as well. This one is even worse.

Microsoft makes more than an operating system, and their OS is placed on a lot of computers, by choice. It would make sense that their other software is included in the OS.

I have a website. DD has a website. DD's website is far more popular than mine. But I can't sue DD because my content is not on his website.

And MS does not own a monopoly. I don't care how you spin it, there is competition, and other makers out there. That is not a monopoly. A majority, sure, not a monopoly.

You want a monopoly? Look at your local bills. You electric bill, cable bill, phone... do you have a choice in electric provider? Is there another phone company that can give you a land line? Or another cable company to offer cable tv? (no satellite doesn't count). Most likely not, you move to an area and such and such company owns that area, you must use their services or go without.

If Opera gains anything from this frivolous lawsuit, perhaps they can make it so MS can allow the end user to UNinstall IE or media player, but beyond that I hope they get nothing. It is a waste of time, and I am tired of seeing crybaby players in a no crying game.

[djr33]

Well, it's a dirty game (business), and I wouldn't mind the most troublesome competitor (M$) losing in this case, regardless of how logical your above argument is.

If you cheat to stop a cheater and you win, isn't that basically fair?

//shrug

[BLiZZaRD]

No, it just puts another cheater at my table.

It is all about money and who has it and who wants it. Microsoft didn't always have the $$ it does now, and they started from somewhere too. Opera can do they same thing, but instead would rather take the money from Microsoft instead of earning it.

Proof? Okay, forget $$. Everything about MS was exactly the same as it is right now, everything, the number of users, the components, bundling IE and WMP with the OS, etc etc. The ONLY difference is Microsoft was open source.

Would they still be getting sued?

[Twey]

What browser should MS bundle? I think the fairest method would be to - when you first boot up a new system, give the user the choice of all available browsers for that OS. But, this might not be all that feasible, then again, why not?

Why not indeed? Most Linux distros do this.

I think the whole thing is ridiculous. When you have it people come after it. That is basically what MS is dealing with. They have it (be it dollars or people using their stuff, etc.) and everyone else wants it. I thought the media player one was stupid as well. This one is even worse.

Not quite. Windows has a majority share of the desktop, yes (and whether it got there entirely fairly is under dispute; practices like offering computer stores license discounts if they only sell machines running Windows might be considered unfair by some). However, the problem here is that it's using that majority share of the desktop to push its other products. You can say:

also I mean users can if they do not want to use IE they are allowed to goto another site and just download a different browser

... but the truth of the matter is that most users don't download new software. Whatever's installed by default is what they'll use, and this gives IE a huge advantage over competing products. I'm constantly amazed that Firefox is doing as well as it is, but while IE is shipped by default with Windows the chances of it (or anything else) ever gaining a majority share is low. This use of one product to promote another is illegal by both American and European anti-trust laws, and Microsoft have faced this claim before. Last time, they got out of it by saying that IE was an inextricably linked part of Windows, and then altering their software to make this plausible (although it really isn't, as evidenced by hacked "lite" versions of Windows that run perfectly well without IE).

Proof? Okay, forget $$. Everything about MS was exactly the same as it is right now, everything, the number of users, the components, bundling IE and WMP with the OS, etc etc. The ONLY difference is Microsoft was open source.

Would they still be getting sued?

If they were still a commercial product, yes.

[djr33]

Twey brings up an interesting point that it's surprising FF is as popular as it is.

Imagine if IE did adhere to strict standards-- that would really be a monopoly. Heh. Perhaps this is all a legal maneuver-- the non-standards-compliance is entirely intentional. Ha.

[BLiZZaRD]

So what? MS pickets for Quirks? LOL

[molendijk]

Come on, guys! Hasn't history shown us that fanatism, prejudice, firm convictions about who or what is right or wrong etc. leads to STUPID WAR! I don't see the difference between religious zelots fighting for their GOD while killing the 'unfaithful', and browser believers (Opera-believers or FF-believers vs IE-believers, and vice versa). If computer-fanatism is going to replace religious fanatism, then I'll gladly go back to the times of wooden toys.

The problem? Too much testosteron! Apes have lots of it.

Arie M.