On the final day of closed hearings with the EC in Brussels, Microsoft told reporters that Neil Barrett, an independent computer scientists appointed to oversee Microsoft’s compliance, had given the company a new opportunity.
Microsoft lawyer Brad Smith told reporters that Barrett had outlined a compliance plan for Microsoft that would enable the company to comply.
It finally gives us the kind of specificity and clarity that we need in order to work in a constructive way and to move all these issues forward, Smith told the Associated Press.
Smith said Microsoft was very encouraged that the company would be able to meet the EC requirements to provide technical information to its server software rivals.
The EC initially ordered this directive in 2004 to ensure rival software works just as well as Microsoft’s on a Windows-based machine. The EC said that if Microsoft does not comply it would pay daily fines backdated to December 15.
Despite Microsoft’s claim of a breakthrough in the case in the form of Barrett, the European Committee for Interoperable Systems said the fundamental issue of Microsoft failing to provide the necessary technical information remains.
Two years on, Microsoft’s technical documentation remains incomplete, inaccurate and unusable, said the group of software companies, in a statement.
Still, Microsoft’s upbeat attitude was a departure from its previous accusations that the EC and some of its software rivals had a negative influence on an independent monitor’s report, which was critical about Microsoft’s compliance efforts.
Microsoft had previously said the EC has not been clear about the company’s obligations and what it needs to do to comply. The EC has denied this claim by saying the 302-page order it gave to Microsoft in 2004 was explicit.
An EC spokesperson told reporters that Microsoft was still required to comply with the 2004 directive. The monitor is an adviser to the European Commission and does not make proposals, EC spokesperson Jonathan Todd told AP.
A day earlier, Microsoft said six tech companies, including storage vendors EMC and Network Appliances, would testify at the hearings that a 1,200-page technical manual Microsoft had provided was adequate. But the EC maintains the document was virtually useless.
And Microsoft rivals, including IBM, Oracle and Novell, reportedly testified that Microsoft had failed to comply with the EC’s original antitrust directive.
The EC expects it will be several weeks before it rules on whether to levy the fines on Microsoft.
