Microsoft To Give EU Windows Code

Microsoft Corp. said Wednesday it will let competitors examine some of the blueprints to its flagship Windows operating system in response to a European Union antitrust ruling calling for greater openness.

Although Microsoft insists it had already complied in December by supplying up to 12,000 pages of documentation and offering rivals 500 hours, or about $100,000 worth, of free technical support apiece, it says it will license the Windows source code to address any lingering concerns that EU and U.S. regulatory officials may have.

Last month, an independent monitor nominated by Microsoft found that the documents already provided by the company were "totally unfit for its intended purpose."

The European Commission said it would study Microsoft's offer carefully once it had received the full details, adding that it looked forward to receiving by the Feb. 15 deadline Microsoft's reply to the complaints it made in December.

"The source code is the ultimate documentation," said Brad Smith, Microsoft's chief counsel. "It should have the answer to any questions that remain."

The technical information is important for competitors to make their software compatible with Windows servers. Software developers will have to pay for the right to inspect the source code and will be prohibited from publicly disseminating the information.

By contrast, the code for open-source platforms such as Linux is publicly available without charge.

Several countries, including Brazil, China, France, Germany, Japan and South Korea have been actively moving toward open-source alternatives like Linux, and Microsoft has been under increased pressure to make its proprietary code available for inspection.

Microsoft has launched a number of efforts to give governments and certain private groups access to some source code. Wednesday's announcement extends this for the first time to more than 20 companies who currently license Microsoft software protocols under an EU program.

Microsoft will now share what it says is a "pretty significant" chunk of its Windows workgroup server operating system and desktop software code governing communications between servers. Smith said there were no plans to publish every line of the entire Windows source code.

In March 2004, the EU levied a record $613 million fine against Microsoft.

It also ordered the company to share code with rivals and offer a version of Windows without the Media Player software for what the court saw as an abuse of the company's dominant position in the industry.

Last month, the European Commission threatened to fine Microsoft up to $2.36 million a day, retroactive to Dec. 15, saying the software giant was proving intransigent about sharing data with competitors.

Wednesday's "bold stroke" by Microsoft is designed "to put that issue to rest," Smith said.

Microsoft, based in Redmond, Washington, is appealing the ruling and the case will be heard in late April by the European Court of First Instance, the EU's second-highest court.

Smith told a news conference he was "confident" of winning the case, saying the world had moved on since the EU opened its antitrust investigation eight years ago. He cited the popularity of Apple Computer Inc.'s iPod music player and its iTunes music software.

"If anything it is clear that there are more opportunities for competitors today than there were a few years ago," he said.

The EU repeated its complaints that Microsoft was not providing enough information to let rivals develop server software that works smoothly with Windows PCs and servers.

"The Commission sent the statement of objections because of Microsoft's failure to disclose complete and accurate interface documentation to allow non-Microsoft workgroup servers to achieve full interoperability with Windows PCs and servers, despite its obligation to do so under the terms of the Commission's March 2004 decision that Microsoft was abusing its dominant market position," it said.

EU spokesman Jonathan Todd noted that the U.S. Department of Justice was also claiming that Microsoft was failing to provide the technical information asked for in a DOJ settlement.