Acton Institute: EU case against Microsoft ‘immoral’

“Last week, European Union commissioner Mario Monti inflicted a 497 million Euros fine on Microsoft – the highest fine in the history of European antitrust regulation. The case against Microsoft was waged, in Europe as it was in the United States, by its competitors. What these companies don’t want is for Microsoft to ‘prevent’ them from succeeding in the European market. What competitors really fear is Microsoft’s ability to satisfy consumers better than they do, at a cheaper price,” Alberto Mingardi writes for The Acton Institute for the Study of Religion and Liberty.

“Microsoft is far from the only practitioner of integrated applications. Apple integrates and bundles its own software for Internet browsing (‘Safari’) as well as for multimedia applications (‘Itunes’). In the parable of the talents (Matthew 25:14-30), the ‘wicked and lazy’ servant who hid his talent in the ground is punished and the money is taken away from him. The productive and the entrepreneurial are praised, whereas the lazy is blamed. Antitrust rulings such as Mario Monti

47 Comments

  1. what’s worng is the bundling analogy. windows media player is tightly integrated into the OS. internet explorer is tightly integrated into the OS. MS is claiming that those components are critical to the computer’s operating system – basically saying they are not stand alone apps.

    safari is not integrated into the OS, itunes is not integrated into the OS. they are both (as well as quicktime) stand alone apps. that is a huge difference. because MS integrated IE and WMP into windows, that’s illegal. and thus they should be held accountable.

    period.

  2. Yeah right? Give me a break, let M$ dwindle to even something like 60% dominance in the market place. Then would this guy be happy? No, he’s another blow-hard for all things american without truly understanding the situation, he speaks on the morals and values of anything from somewhere else opposing an american company is a slap in america’s face and a disgrace to the ‘truly great land of our.’ M$ is a far cry from say a super pro-american corp. like AmWay. Plain and simple, they aspire to another not so admirable american marketing tenant, “make crap and make tons of it!”

    I’m not anti patriotic, far from it, but I know crap when I see it and am able to separate that fact from my patriotism.

  3. I agree with the author we should ALL do as the Bible says…

    1. Marriage shall not impede a man’s right to take concubines in addition to his wife or wives. (II Sam 5:13; I Kings 11:3; II Chron 11:21)

    2. A marriage shall be considered valid only if the wife is a virgin. If the wife is not a virgin, she shall be executed. (Deut 22:13-21)

    3. Marriage of a believer and a non-believer shall be forbidden. (Gen 24:3; Num 25:1-9; Ezra 9:12; Neh 10:30)

    4. Since marriage is for life, no state or federal law shall be construed to permit divorce. (Deut 22:19; Mark 10:9)

    5. In lieu of marriage, if there are no acceptable men in your town, it is required that you get your dad drunk and have sex with him (even if he had previously offered you up as a sex toy to men young and old), tag-teaming with any sisters you may have. Of course, this rule applies only if you are female. (Gen 19:31-36)

    But, some Biblical laws are a bit unclear to me…

    I would like to sell my daughter into slavery, as sanctioned in Exodus 21:7. In this day and age, what do you think would be a fair price for her?

    I know that I am allowed no contact with a woman while she is in her period of menstrual uncleanliness (Lev. 15:19-24). The problem is, how do I tell? I have tried asking, but most women take offence.

    Lev. 25:44 states that I may indeed possess slaves, both male and female, provided they are purchased from neighbouring nations. A friend of mine claims that this applies to Mexicans, but not Canadians. Can you clarify? Why can’t I own Canadians?

    I have a neighbour who insists on working on the Sabbath. Exodus 35:2 clearly states he should be put to death. Am I morally obligated to kill him myself?

    A friend of mine feels that even though eating shellfish is an abomination (Lev. 11:10), it is a lesser abomination than homosexuality. I don’t agree. Can you settle this?

    Lev. 21:20 states that I may not approach the altar of God if I have a defect in my sight. I have to admit that I wear reading glasses. Does my vision have to be 20/20, or is there some wiggle room here?

    Most of my male friends get their hair trimmed, including the hair around their temples, even though this is expressly forbidden by Lev.19:27. How should they die?

    I know from Lev. 11:6-8 that touching the skin of a dead pig makes me unclean, but may I still play football if I wear gloves?

    Just wondering!

  4. This guy doesn’t even know what he’s talking about. Must be another of these new age journalists. “less effective at satisfying consumers” ? Yea I’ll be sure to complement M$ next worm I get in my E-mail.

  5. What’s funny is, on the Mac, you can remove iTunes and Safari and the OS still operates perfectly fine, flawless. You cannot remove Internet Explorer and Windows Media Player and expect Windows to run Flawlessly. In fact, you can’t patch or update it for security unless you have these two installed and updated. You don’t have a choice with Windows. You *HAVE* that choice with Mac OS. BIG DIFFERENCE! (and look, I didn’t have to cite biblical passages, either.)

  6. Yes. It’s the way WMP and IE are part of the OS that’s the problem. OS-X also has Quicktime as an intrinsic part of the OS, kust like Audio Units or Cocoa or whatever. The difference is that Quicktime Player, iTunes, Fincal Cut, iMovie are all applications that USE quicktime, and third party developers can also quicktime should they want to.

    So Windows Media being part of the OS, providing some facilities to developers is not a problem. Being a closed system that developers don’t know about and can’t create competing products on IS a problem.

  7. MacDailyNews Take: One need only to compare Apple’s Safari (or “alternative” browsers for the Windows platform) to Microsoft’s old and relatively featureless Internet Explorer to see why the EU position is correct. No competition results in stagnation. MS IE is not the best browser by a long shot, but it is by far the most used, simply because Microsoft abused its monopoly position. Now, Microsoft is trying it with Windows Media Player. Mingardi is wrong.

    Mingardi is a religious nut.

  8. Now now, people. Clearly Microsoft satisfies its users FAR better than Apple. Isn’t it obvious? ” width=”19″ height=”19″ alt=”smile” style=”border:0;” />

Reader Feedback

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.