A Stitch in Haste

You may know that the Eurocrats, who like to smack down U.S. companies because they're...well, U.S. companies...has been molesting Microsoft recently over silly antitrust allegations.

But here's a particularly perverse part of the E.U.'s war against good, cheap stuff:

"Microsoft is forced to create an adaptation of Windows that it would never consider creating otherwise and it must label it with its valuable Windows trademark," Microsoft lawyer Jean-Francois Bellis told the court. "It strikes at the very heart of Microsoft's business model and design of Windows." Linda Averett of Microsoft said that many Web sites and software products will not work without Windows Media Player. Consumers who buy computers with Windows "are very likely to feel deceived when they find that Web sites don't work." She said that consumers will be uncertain how Windows might change in the future. "What other piece is going to be gone? The graphics file?" she said. "This is a serious problem."

Imagine regulators ordering Coca-Cola to offer flat soda right next to carbonated soda so consumers "would have a choice." What if nobody wants that choice? The action by the E.U. is especially absurd given that Windows Media Player, RealPlayer, QuickTime, iTunes and who knows how many other media players are all available for free anyway.

Where exactly is the logic of forcing Microsoft to remove a vital but non-revenue component of its operating system? Of course, there isn't any logic -- except that a U.S. company is hassled and harassed by regulatory bureaucrats who probably couldn't change their screensaver settings.

Pathetic.

Related Posts:
Microsoft and Mozilla: An Update (Microsoft's So-Called "Monopoly")
Many Happy Returns (Microsoft Dividend Announcement)
What Channel Country? What Station Price? (U.K. versus iTunes)
Franken-Wine's Monster (Europe's War on GM Food)