Nut Complaint
After MSFT I and II, bringing an Article 102 TFEU case against the Redmond giant may have seemed an easy shot.
This is probably what prompted the Omnis Group to lodge in December 2009 a complaint with the Commission alleging violations of Article 101 and 102 TFEU.
The Commission rightly dismissed the complaint in December 2010.
From both a factual and legal standpoint, the complaint looks indeed like a (bad) competition joke.
Read and judge for yourself:
- The allegations relating to Article 102 TFEU concern a market (Enterprise Resource Planning software) on which MSFT had a market share<5%. When the Commission disputed the complainant’s dominance allegation, Omnis Group had this to reply: the Commission’s data – which is based on market intelligence from Gartner and IDC – is flawed. Microsoft lied to market research companies. Quotes from wikipedia confirm Microsoft’s important market position…
- Besides invoking all the existing types of antitrust violations under Article 101 and 102 (tying, refusal to deal, discrimination, cartel (!), monopoly (!)), the complainant took issue with a number of exotic antitrust infringements: misuse of European funds, violations of public procurement rules and corruption by Microsoft. No comment.
- Last, but not least, the complainant requested a oral hearing pursuant to Regulation 773/2004.
Omnis Group lawyers should be commended for their knowledge of competition law, and their impressive mastering of legal strategy.
This, to me, is one of the nuttiest cases of 2010.
Chillin'Competition 
Reading the books might present to you a different angle to look at the case.
Omnis Group was forced to complain to the Commission after abuses which are not specified in the law books but are practiced by international oraganized crime.
Click to access microsoft_the_guardian_angel_vol_2.pdf
Click to access microsoft-the_guardian_angel.pdf
The submissions of 20
September, 21 September and 22 September concern Omnis Group’s contacts with OLAF and
the alleged intellectual property aspects of the case and do not contain any information that
would change the Commission’s assessment as outlined in this decision.
In fact the competition case is one of the minor effects generated by Microsoft and its partners on the internal market and in Romania.
25 January 2010 – Bill Gates “You’ve got to decide: do you want to obey the laws of the
countries you’re in or not?” Gates told ABC’s Good Morning America in January. “If not, you
may not end up doing business there.”
Doing business in Romania (the most corrupt country in EU) requires a set of skills which Microsoft do certaily has got :
Click to access Finalversion_Consumerchoicepaper.pdf
Dragos Riscanu
12 May 2011 at 7:38 pm
Dear Sir,
Do you still read the international press ?
It seems that Microsoft is an international engine for corruption from China to Romania via Italy … incredible ??
We can tell you that corruption is the nicest thing they do, in fact they are dedicated to their associations with extreme criminal organizations in Russia, Romania and other countries … very soon you will be better informed so that we can decide eventually a reevaluation of your assesments.
Best regards,
D. Riscanu
D. Riscanu
2 April 2013 at 3:35 pm