Microsoft Refutes European Commission Case
Feb. 15, 2006
The company’s response to Commission allegations provides clear evidence that Microsoft is in full compliance with the technical documentation mandate. The response also documents how the Commission has disregarded evidence and denied due process.

REDMOND, Wash., Feb. 15, 2006 -- Microsoft has complied fully with the technical documentation requirements imposed by a 2004 European Commission decision, and the Commission has ignored critical evidence in its haste to attack the company’s compliance, according to a formal response filed by Microsoft today.

“Hundreds of Microsoft employees and contractors have worked for more than 30,000 hours to create over 12,000 pages of detailed technical documents that are available for license today.  In addition Microsoft has offered to provide licensees with 500 hours of technical support and has made its source code related to all the relevant technologies available under a reference license,” the company said in a 75-page response filed Wednesday.

The company also filed with the Commission two independent expert reports by software system engineering professors who examined the technical documentation created by Microsoft.

“We conclude that the interoperability information as provided by Microsoft meets current industry standards, particularly in such a complex domain.  We believe that it has provided complete and accurate information, to the extent that this can be reasonably achieved, covering protocols, dependencies and implicit knowledge,” noted a 49-page report authored by five computer science professors in the United Kingdom and Germany. 

The company’s response also documents numerous ways in which the Commission had ignored key information and denied Microsoft due process in defending itself.

“The Commission waited many months before informing Microsoft that it believed changes were necessary to the technical documents, and then gave Microsoft only a few weeks to make extensive revisions,” Microsoft’s filing states.

Microsoft’s response clearly shows that the Commission did not even review the exhaustive documentation Microsoft submitted within the deadline period. 

“When the Commission issued its Statement of Objections on December 21, 2005, the Commission and its experts had not even bothered to read the most recent version of those documents which Microsoft had made available on December 15, 2005,” Microsoft’s filing states.

Similarly, the response demonstrates that the Commission repeatedly refused to clearly define its requirements and concerns, despite repeated requests and accommodations by Microsoft.

About Microsoft

Founded in 1975, Microsoft Corp. (Nasdaq “MSFT”) is the worldwide leader in software, services and solutions that help people and businesses realize their full potential.

This material is for informational purposes only. Microsoft Corp disclaims all warranties and conditions with regard to use of the material for other purposes. Microsoft Corp shall not, at any time, be liable for any special, direct, indirect or consequential damages, whether in an action of contract, negligence or other action arising out of or in connection with the use or performance of the material. Nothing herein should be construed as constituting any kind of warranty.

Microsoft is a registered trademark of Microsoft Corp in the United States and/or other countries.

The names of actual companies and products mentioned herein may be the trademarks of their respective owners.

Note to editors: If you are interested in viewing additional information on Microsoft, please visit the Microsoft Web page at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass on Microsoft’s corporate information pages. Web links, telephone numbers and titles were correct at time of publication, but may since have changed. For additional assistance, journalists and analysts may contact Microsoft’s Rapid Response Team or other appropriate contacts listed at http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/contactpr.mspx.

Read More: