Score 355 Million for Competition, or Regulation Maybe

Nothing gets a green libertarian, which could also be called a "natural capitalist," more flummoxed than a good antitrust case. So many horror stories of regulation running amok, having an opposite from the intended effect; furthermore, history shows these corrections are often short-term solutions, as corporate criminals just figure out a sneakier way to accomplish the same thing. The new accounting standards adopted (and enforced by the SEC) since Enron's collapse are, ironically, hurting small businesses; wouldn't you bet that determined shysters are screwing around just as much -- cooking the books with a different recipe? So what was accomplished?

I don't mean to suggest that regulation is always, or even mostly, of limited value; there are plenty of excellent examples of exploitation being successfully reined in by a public-controlled watchdog. But I've never seen a study of the aggregate net sum, and am not sure such a study is feasible.

Thankfully, I am a techie as well as a pundit, and therefore the EU vs Microsoft case has a clear and distinct "default" bad guy: Microsoft. Whew!

Microsoft's explanation of why they haven't complied with the EU's antitrust ruling, and therefore must pay approx. $355 million, is that they don't quite understand what the EU wants. For those tempted to accept this I have two words: March 2004. That's when the ruling was announced, written down, and no doubt handed to one or more fairly intelligent people at Microsoft.

It's now about 28 months later. Now I'm not a genius -- okay, fine, I am a genius -- but I suspect that I could figure out almost anything in 28 months. Especially a written document telling me what to do in order to make billions of dollars legally in several countries.

Pay no attention to the wounded-soldier act Microsoft is doing here. I've read the EU decision, and it's pretty clear what is required. What is not clear could've been made so if Microsoft had simply asked. Instead, they chose to grandstand in the press, play up the whole Media Player non-issue (and convince at least one fairly intelligent person that it was important), and -- the most hilarious bit -- hand over some source code instead of the asked-for documentation*. Now they are paying the price.

Which is $355 million. So far.

* For those of you just joining the geeky squad, source code is not API documentation. Microsoft's release suggests that it's even better, but it's not. It's as though you asked a guy how to start a car and he gave you Maxwell's equations relating magnetism and electricity.