The new plan, “Software Assurance” ties companies to a two year maintenance agreement under which they must upgrade software every two years. The programme attracted much criticism for incurring large price increases. Members of the UK’s Infrastructure Forum claimed that the new proposals amounted to an abuse of Microsoft’s dominant position and labelled it the “Windows tax.”
Although there has been no fundamental change to the new pricing structure, customer reaction has pushed Microsoft to give companies extra time to adapt.
“It is in response to customer feedback,” said Microsoft spokesman Dan Leach. “When we talked to customers about the issue, they made it clear they needed sufficient time to examine their existing licenses, review the improvements [in the new program] and decide how to take advantage of the new software offering.”
Microsoft is the focus of further attention today, as a result of a Wall Street Journal (WSJ) report. The report alleges that Microsoft is to be the subject of a huge EU fine imposed by European antitrust enforcers. The WSJ has revealed a confidential European investigation alleging that the company illegally used its dominant Windows and Office software to, according to the WSJ, “muscle into the fast-growing market for corporate and Internet computer software, where it faces competition from Sun Microsytems Inc. and others. It also alleges that Microsoft illegally sought to dominate music and video software for the web.”
It is also claimed that Microsoft obstructed the European investigation, by falsely presenting the European Commission with 34 letters from companies purporting to support its case. In many instances, the letters had been written by Microsoft, or the companies weren't aware they were to be used as evidence, the Commission said.
The Commission is also said to have assailed Microsoft’s “abusive and discriminatory” licensing policies and its refusal to supply rivals with interface information necessary to compete.
In the US too, the conduct of the company in relation to competition law is being questioned. The Supreme Court has rejected Microsoft’s request to throw out a ruling that the company violated US competition laws. In effect, Microsoft will face charges of violating anti-trust laws in a lower court, a blow to the company which has been attempting to get the case thrown out altogether.
In its appeal to the Supreme Court, Microsoft had argued that the original ruling in the case, handed down by district judge Thomas Penfield Jackson, was tainted because of his post-trial conduct. However, the Court upheld Judge Jackson’s ruling that Microsoft had used illegal tactics to maintain its dominance of the PC operating market.