Microsoft defends demand for royalties

The New York Times notes that without disclosing what is in the documents, Tom Brookes, a Microsoft spokesperson in Brussels, said the company filed its response to the commission’s charge on March 1 that it was violating a 2004 order to share the code at \'reasonable terms\' so competitors could design software that worked seamlessly with Microsoft computer servers. The legal skirmishes over the European Commission’s antitrust ruling against Microsoft are moving into a fourth year. Microsoft maintains that the other remedy imposed in the 2004 ruling – that it share its confidential server software code – implied that it could charge royalties. The Washington Post notes that Microsoft also repeated its request to the commission for more guidance on what regulators consider an acceptable price. Regulators have called the current prices excessive. The EU had given Microsoft until Monday night to come through with a response on the fees it seeks from competitors to share computer information, and threatened daily fines that could go as high as $4 million a day. It said it would consider the company\'s reply and decide whether to impose a daily penalty. Full report in The New York Times Full report in The Washington Post

In other Microsoft news, the computer giant agreed last week to pay Iowans up to $180m to settle a class-action lawsuit that claimed the company had a monopoly that cost the state’s citizens millions of dollars extra for software products. According to a MSNBC report, the $179.95m settlement means individuals in Iowa who bought certain Microsoft products separately or preinstalled on computers between May 18, 1994, and June 30, 2006, will be eligible for cash. Government agencies and companies with multiple copies purchased between July 1, 2002, and June 30, 2006, can seek vouchers that will enable them to buy computer equipment and software. The amount that can be claimed will depend on which product and how many copies were purchased. The lawsuit claimed Microsoft engaged in illegal monopolisation and anticompetitive conduct between 1994 and 2006 that caused customers to pay more for software than they would have if there had been competition. Full MSNBC report