On 2009-06-12 18:46:02 -0400, consused
<consused@no-mx.forums.opensuse.org> said:
>
> kastorff;1998796 Wrote:
>> ...The whole EU versus Microsoft thing is comical to me,
>> in how far the EU keeps going to achieve something that has nothing to
>> do with monopolies, but more to do with punishing Microsoft. Microsoft
>> keeps giving them what they ask for, but not what they want.
> Unfortunately, it's neither comical or hilarious. The EU wants the
> fines paid. A total disregard of EU competition law in the past by
> MicroSoft, requires a proportionally tough response. It may seem
> unreasonable, but not when taken in context of past behavior, and the
> scale of the infringement i.e. it's punishment. 
It's also an attempt
> to mitigate the imbalance in the market.
>
>> Think of a government insisting that Toyota not only ship a car with no
>> built in engine, but offer installation of competitors' engines at
>> point of sale...
> I agree with Chrysantine. It's the wrong example since Toyota doesn't
> dominate the EU marketplace in the way Microsoft did and still does.
Well, I'm allowed to laugh at the EU all I want.
Each to their opinion.
It's too bad both you and Chrysantine decided to focus on the use of
"Toyota" in my analogy, and take it literally enough to challenge it on
some assessment of factual market share percentage. It was never a
intended as factual, and I thought that was obvious in context. I'll
remember to use something more generic next time.
In my opinion, the
point of the analogy is still valid, in that the EU just looks silly
and arbitrary in the way they've handled the whole thing.
--
Keith Kastorff