|
The EU's competition watchdog was thrown on the defensive Tuesday as top EU judges sought to determine if Brussels was wrong to fine US software giant Microsoft half a billion euros two years ago.
On the second day of a week-long trial, Judge John Cooke fired questions at both sides in his Luxembourg courtroom, as the case narrowed down to the tough technical arguments at the heart of the high-stakes standoff.
Both legal teams delivered their arguments smoothly on the opening day, but the commission struggled with Cooke's questions Tuesday, although lawyers on its side regained their composure later in the day.
Lawyer Thomas Vinje, who is representing Microsoft's industry rivals, took the commission's difficulties in his stride and insisted that "both sides took a battering" under the barrage of questions from the judges.
Microsoft has asked the European Union's second-highest court to hear the case in the hope that they will overturn the European Commission's 2004 anti-trust ruling against it.
After a five-year investigation, the Commission took its biggest competition decision ever in March 2004 when it found that Microsoft had broken EU law by using a quasi-monopoly in personal computer operating systems to thwart rivals.
In addition to fining Microsoft 497 million euros (612 million dollars), the EU ordered the company to sell a version of its Windows operating system without its Media Player software and to divulge information about Windows needed by makers of rival products.
The focus of the first two days at the trial has been on whether or not Microsoft's practice of including Media Player software in the ubiquitous Windows thwarted competitors with rival media programmes, as Brussels insists.
"How can you compete with ubiquity?" stressed commission lawyer Per Hellstrom.
Cooke, a 62-year-old Irish judge, wanted to know whether or not Media Player was an independent application programme or an integral part of Windows, as Microsoft claims.
"Microsoft itself calls (Media Player) an application. Why does it call it an application if it's an integrated" part of Windows, he asked.
As the trial progresses over the week, judges are to look at whether Microsoft has stamped out competition by withholding key Windows computer code from rivals and whether the commission's fine is excessive.
The 13 judges hearing the case are not expected to come out with a ruling, which can be appealed, until the end of this year at the very earliest as they sift through the technical details and complicated arguments.
Microsoft, which has hired former EU judges to rehearse for the trial, appeared well-prepared as its legal experts and executives fielded tough questions.
Despite a strong showing on the first day, the commission's Hellstrom appeared less at ease Tuesday morning, hesitating and stumbling at times in answers to judges' questions.
On Microsoft's side, the company is counting on its legal chief Brad Smith to coordinate the closely choreographed appearances of its 60-strong team of lawyers, computer experts and executives.
No stranger to showdowns with competition regulators on both sides of the Atlantic, Smith lived up to his reputation as a smooth operator, keeping his public statements on the margins of the trial to crisp but uncompromising soundbites.
Even on the commission's side of the courtroom, Smith has earned respect with one lawyer describing him as "very, very brilliant".
(Source: EUBusiness)
[ 04-28-2006, 04:58 PM: Message edited by: Dreamer128 ]
|