A European judge has called for a closed-door meeting on Thursday to discuss the peace deals hammered out earlier this month between Microsoft and two of its biggest critics, the Computer and Communications Industry Association and the software firm, Novell.
The talks could be coloured by reports of the $20-million settlement with the CCIA, some of which allegedly went directly to the industry group’s president, Ed Black.
Nokia, the Finnish phone maker, confirmed that it had quit the CCIA in protest at the deal. It had left last month because it felt the ”process and content of the settlement” was ”inappropriate”. It declined to comment further.
Thursday’s hearing on the appeal against interim remedies imposed on Microsoft will be overseen by Bo Vesterdorf, president of the court of first instance in Luxembourg. It aims to discover why the CCIA and Novell withdrew support for the European commission, which imposed a record â,¬497-million anti-trust fine on Microsoft earlier this year.
Sources in Brussels said the judge wanted to know how to treat evidence from parties that had since dropped out of the action. The hearing could lead to a negotiated settlement.
Black had been one of the most vocal critics of Microsoft before the rapprochement. He once called Microsoft a ”rapacious monopoly that should be broken up”, describing its conduct as ”consistently illegal”.
The trade body had been the only remaining interested party trying to force a US supreme court review of Microsoft’s landmark settlement with the justice department. In Brussels, Microsoft has now settled with the CCIA, Novell, Time Warner and Sun Microsystems, leaving only RealNetworks as its remaining big corporate opponent.
As part of the settlement, Microsoft has become a member of the industry group.
Industry sources in Brussels suggested that Black had received about $2-million when the CCIA board reconvened after Nokia quit the trade body.
The software company said: ”Microsoft agreed to make a payment to CCIA as an organisation as reimbursement for certain legal and related expenditure that it had incurred.
”It was, of course, up to the CCIA board to decide how to use the money it received from us and we had no involvement at all in that process.”
Black declined to comment in detail on Wednesday, saying: ”We have an obligation not to talk about the terms of the settlement.” He said the CCIA had not been bought off with the settlement. ”We withdrew from specific litigation proceedings. We have no obligation to stop our lobbying or our public relations efforts on areas outside the litigation.”
He added: ”We have withdrawn from very expensive litigation without recanting or retracting a single statement. We have maintained our position. We’re not changing sides.”
Microsoft said it reached settlements with CCIA and Novell to try to resolve conflicts in the industry — and avoid future litigation — without regulators’ intervention. It still wants a negotiated deal with the EU. ”Our intent all along has been to resolve the conflicts of the past to build more constructive relationships in the industry,” said a spokesperson.
Judge Vesterdorf is soon due to issue a ruling on Microsoft’s appeal for the suspension of the commission’s ”remedies”, including forcing it to issue a version of its Windows operating system without its Mediaplayer application.
The commission has insisted that the withdrawal of some of its former backers is no reason to drop the case, which is likely to be heard in full in 2006 and last up to two years.
What Ed Black said
‘The facts of this case … have focused on Microsoft’s anti-competitive behaviour and illegal tactics, which they have used to steamroller companies, and force unwanted business deals on most, crushing the few who would not bend to their will.’
On the original US judgment, November 5 1999
‘Microsoft is an adjudicated monopolist who continues to deliver anti-competitive, illegal products into the marketplace. Their products hurt innovation, unfairly impede competition and, in the end, harm consumers.’
August 10 2001
‘Only vigorous government enforcement and judicially imposed restraints will have any real chance to restrain Microsoft’s ongoing unlawful conduct.’
On Microsoft’s $750-million payment to Netscape to settle legal action, May 29 2003
‘The anti-competitive behaviour of Microsoft addressed by this case and this decision is just the tip of the iceberg.’
On the collapse of talks between the European commission and Microsoft, March 18 2004
‘We are pleased with this agreement and expect our relationship with Microsoft and others will enable us to address important issues impacting millions of people and the future of our industry. While there may be times when we and Microsoft will not agree on every issue, we are looking forward to developing a stronger relationship.’ – Guardian Unlimited Â