EditorsAbout the SiteComes vs. MicrosoftUsing This Web SiteSite ArchivesCredibility IndexOOXMLOpenDocumentPatentsNovellNews DigestSite NewsRSS

09.10.11

Cablegate: Competition Commissioner Neelie Kroes Accused of “Undermin[ing] Support for Intellectual Property” in Microsoft Case

Posted in Antitrust, Cablegate, Europe, Microsoft, Patents at 10:22 am by Dr. Roy Schestowitz

Cablegate

Summary: A look at accusations from private companies, directed at the mere enforcement of interoperability and fair competition

“Attack” on IPR (the sacred cow) is how the US described Brazil's choice of a mostly American/international standard, OpenDocument Format.

In the following Cablegate cable (several parts culminating in ¶11), the sort of nonsense Kroes had to cope with for merely pressuring (or punishing) a monopoly abuser can be seen. It it also being rebutted in the cable.


VZCZCXRO5104
PP RUEHAG RUEHDF RUEHIK RUEHLZ RUEHROV RUEHSR
DE RUEHBS #0172/01 0371546
ZNR UUUUU ZZH
P 061546Z FEB 09
FM USEU BRUSSELS
TO RUEHC/SECSTATE WASHDC PRIORITY
RUEATRS/DEPT OF TREASURY WASHDC
INFO RUCNMEM/EU MEMBER STATES COLLECTIVE
RUCPDOC/USDOC WASHDC
RUEAWJA/DEPT OF JUSTICE WASHDC

UNCLAS SECTION 01 OF 03 BRUSSELS 000172

SENSITIVE
SIPDIS

JUSTICE FOR C. HARROP
STATE PLS PASS TO FTC FOR J. PARISI
PLEASE PASS TO USTR
STATE FOR E, EUR/ERA, EEB/TPP
NSC FOR KRISTINA KVIEN

NOT FOR INTERNET DISTRIBUTION

E.O. 12958: N/A
TAGS: ECIN [Economic Integration and Cooperation], ECON [Economic Conditions], EFIN [Financial and Monetary Affairs], EINV [Foreign Investments], ECPS [Communications and Postal Systems], EUN [European Union]
SUBJECT: EU COMPETITION AUTHORITIES HOPE TO MAKE GOOD U.S.-EU
COOPERATION EVEN BETTER

¶1. (SBU) SUMMARY. DG Competition officials told USEU January
14 they hope to work closely with the Obama Administration to
improve already strong U.S.-EU competition policy cooperation.
Officials in the DG Competition Chief Economist’s office and
International Unit said bilateral cooperation has been strong
on mergers and cartels but can improve in the antitrust area.
The officials hoped that an Obama DOJ will move closer to FTC
positions on mergers and unilateral conduct by firms. DG
Competition’s chief economist stressed the increasing role of
economic analysis in EU competition case review, and said
high-profile cases against Intel and Microsoft support this
trend and have not weakened EU support for IP protection. The
officials seek to cooperate with the U.S. on support for new
competition agencies in India, China and elsewhere. While the
Competition Commissioner and Director General will change late
this year, DG COMP’s keen interest in engaging with new senior
U.S. officials offers a good opportunity to deepen this
important relationship. END SUMMARY.

DG COMP OFFICIALS SEEK TO IMPROVE ALREADY STRONG U.S.-EU
COMPETITION COOPERATION
——————————————— ———

¶2. (SBU) Dominique Van Der Wee, Unit Head for International
Relations at the European Commission Directorate General for
Competition (DG COMP), told USEU January 14 that Competition
Commissioner Kroes, Director General Philip Lowe, and other DG
COMP officials value highly their existing close relations
with U.S. competition officials at the Federal Trade
Commission (FTC) and Department of Justice (DOJ). Van Der Wee
said DG COMP sees a difference in antitrust enforcement
attitudes between FTC and DOJ, however, and expressed the hope
that incoming Obama DOJ officials will move toward FTC’s “more
aggressive” positions, particularly on mergers and unilateral
conduct by firms. He said that existing bilateral cooperation
has been strong on mergers and cartels, but can improve in the
area of unilateral conduct. He noted that a U.S.-EU agreement
in fall 2008 to establish high-level regular phone calls on
unilateral conduct cases, to function as an “early warning”
system of major actions, has yet to be implemented fully; he
hoped this could resume with incoming officials by March.

¶3. (SBU) Van Der Wee said there is “enormous interest”
throughout DG COMP in meeting incoming senior FTC and DOJ
officials, perhaps at the ABA Conference in Washington March
25-27.

¶4. (SBU) On February 2 USEU EconMin heard the same message of
cooperation from DG COMP chief economist Damien Neven and two
members of his team (Oliver Stehmann, deputy chief economist,
and Miguel de la Mano, economist). Neven said his office has
had good relations generally for the past few years with the
economists’ teams at FTC and DOJ, although in 2008, relations
were less active due to the pending U.S. presidential
transition. He said he had suggested recently to DOJ that the
annual chief economists’ exchanges be restarted, possibly in
July this year, and seemed to get a positive response. Neven
explained that working level contacts on mergers have
continued to be particularly strong, noting extensive DG COMP-
FTC discussions during consideration in late 2007 and early
2008 of Google-DoubleClick merger (NOTE: which both the U.S.
and EU approved. End note).

BUT CHALLENGES REMAIN OVER ANTITRUST COOPERATION
——————————————— —

¶5. (SBU) Neven noted that antitrust cooperation has been more
complicated, and suggested that more extensive U.S.
confidentiality requirements may limiting useful information
exchange after the USG has opened an investigation. He said
this leads the U.S. side “to ask lots of questions but not be
able to share as much.” (Note: U.S. and EU rules on
confidentiality waivers differ in some respects, but the U.S.
can share information with waivers. End note).

¶6. (SBU) Neven also pointed to the “wide gap” between FTC and
DOJ over unilateral conduct, which he said had made it more
difficult to establish points of common concern with the USG.
He said DG COMP hopes that the DOJ enforcement report on
Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act was an “outlier,” in

BRUSSELS 00000172 002 OF 003

advocating a “more extreme position,” and thought this view
would change under the Obama team. (Note: the 2008 report
covered unilateral conduct by firms, and was not endorsed by
FTC. End note). Neven did say that Deputy Director General
for antitrust and mergers Nadia Calvino’s one conference call
in 2008 with DOJ and FTC was very productive, however, and
hoped these could continue.

ROLE OF EU CHIEF ECONOMIST IN CASE REVIEW
—————————————–

¶7. (SBU) USEU asked about Neven the evolving role of the Chief
Economist’s office in DG COMP review of competition cases.
Neven said there has been a consistent trend for stronger
economic input on “theory of harm” into case analysis, with
measurable results. (Comment: EU competition law has evolved
from a purely legal analysis to more emphasis over the last
decade on economic impacts in evaluating antitrust and merger
concerns. End comment). Neven highlighted the example of the
RyanAir-Aerlingus merger report from 2008, which contains 100
pages of economic analysis (of 400 total).

¶8. (SBU) Neven’s office details one to three staff to specific
DG COMP case teams, he continued. He said his team is
increasingly involved in sectoral inquiries, with three of his
staff working on the ongoing pharmaceutical inquiry. (Note:
DG COMP issued a preliminary report on its major
pharmaceutical inquiry in November; the final report is
expected in mid-2009). Neven’s office was less involved in
the influential 2005 energy sectoral inquiry, which led to the
proposed EU 3rd energy liberalization package. (Note: this
package remains under consideration by the EU Council and
Parliament. End note).

¶9. (SBU) Neven underscored, however, the “schizophrenic”
nature of his office, which remains independent from the case
teams even as it supports case review. He noted that the non-
horizontal merger guidelines, adopted a year ago, have led to
the issuance of different analyses than would have earlier
been the case. He also said his office had been heavily
involved in state aid review of the many recent financial
sector bailouts, and has played a strong policy development
role here.

CHIEF ECONOMIST: KEY CASES SUPPORT TREND TOWARD ECONOMIC
ANALYSIS, DON’T UNDERMINE IP RIGHTS
——————————————— ———

¶10. (SBU) USEU asked Neven’s views on Intel’s concerns that
the Commission’s seven-year case against the firm for
potential antitrust violations has been “politicized.” He
said it was strange that Intel didn’t respond to the
Commission’s second Statement of Objections (SO) charging the
firm with potential violations. He thought the European Court
of First Instance (CFI) correct in tossing out in early
February Intel’s argument for an extension of its time to
prepare its case. He said Intel may think the Commission has
been very selective in reviewing evidence, but said Intel has
itself been very selective in arguing its position. He said
that both SOs against Intel were economic effects-based,
rejecting Intel’s argument that the Commission dropped an
effects-based position in its second SO. At Intel’s hearing
last year, Neven said a “junior member” of the legal team had
stood up and said “remember the case law,” which doesn’t
directly require effects-based analysis, which Neven
considered the basis for Intel’s (unjustified) claim that the
Commission is ignoring economic effects in evaluating the
firm’s case.

¶11. (SBU) USEU raised concerns increasingly expressed by the
private sector concerns that DG COMP decisions have begun to
undermine support for intellectual property (IP) rights in
Europe. Neven disagreed with this view, declaring that the
2004 Microsoft decision was a special case soundly based on
refusal to supply, with the decision and subsequent CFI
decision expressly recognizing IP rights. His staff explained
that the recent Article 82 guidance paper incorporated these
experiences and lays out how to operationalize such special
tests.

BRUSSELS 00000172 003 OF 003

INTEREST IN COOPERATION ON THIRD COUNTRIES
——————————————

¶12. (SBU) Van Der Wee said DG COMP seeks to develop a
coordinated approach with the U.S. on technical support for
new third country competition agencies, beginning with India,
currently establishing its agency. He added that DG COMP also
seeks to encourage China to join the International Competition
Network (ICN), which may require asking Taiwan to change its
nameplate at ICN, a sensitive issue.

COMMENT
——-

¶13. (SBU) DG COMP clearly expects the advent of a new
Administration will bring changes to U.S. competition
enforcement, and hopes this will “bring the U.S. closer” to EU
positions on unilateral conduct and other key issues.
Competition Commissioner Kroes’ term will end with the
European Commission changeover at the end of this year, while
Director General Philip Lowe will be replaced by Alexander
Italianer, a Dutch economist with whom USEU has strong ties.
EU perceptions of prior U.S.-EU divergences in approach on key
competition issues may be exaggerated, but DG COMP’s keen
interest in engaging with new senior U.S. officials offers a
good opportunity to deepen this important relationship. END
COMMENT.

MURRAY





There are several cables related to this, but they do not show anything of particular interest, so we skip them.

Share this post: These icons link to social bookmarking sites where readers can share and discover new web pages.
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Reddit
  • co.mments
  • DZone
  • email
  • Google Bookmarks
  • LinkedIn
  • NewsVine
  • Print
  • Technorati
  • TwitThis
  • Facebook

If you liked this post, consider subscribing to the RSS feed or join us now at the IRC channels.

Pages that cross-reference this one

What Else is New


  1. Links 19/2/2018: Linux 4.16 RC2, Nintendo Switch Now Full-fledged GNU/Linux

    Links for the day



  2. PTAB Continues to Invalidate a Lot of Software Patents and to Stop Patent Examiners From Issuing Them

    Erasure of software patents by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) carries on unabated in spite of attempts to cause controversy and disdain towards PTAB



  3. The Patent 'Industry' Likes to Mention Berkheimer and Aatrix to Give the Mere Impression of Section 101/Alice Weakness

    Contrary to what patent maximalists keep saying about Berkheimer and Aatrix (two decisions of the Federal Circuit from earlier this month, both dealing with Alice-type challenges), neither actually changed anything in any substantial way



  4. Makan Delrahim is Wrong; Patents Are a Major Antitrust Problem, Sometimes Disguised Using Trolls Somewhere Like the Eastern District of Texas

    Debates and open disagreements over the stance of the lobbyist who is the current United States Assistant Attorney General for the Antitrust Division



  5. Patent Trolls Watch: Microsoft-Connected Intellectual Ventures, Finjan, and Rumour of Technicolor-InterDigital Buyout

    Connections between various patent trolls and some patent troll statistics which have been circulated lately



  6. Software Patents Trickle in After § 101/Alice, But Courts Would Not Honour Them Anyway

    The dawn of § 101/Alice, which in principle eliminates almost every software patent, means that applicants find themselves having to utilise loopholes to fool examiners, but that's unlikely to impress judges (if they ever come to assessing these patents)



  7. In Aatrix v Green Shades the Court is Not Tolerating Software Patents But Merely Inquires/Wonders Whether the Patents at Hand Are Abstract

    Aatrix alleges patent infringement by Green Shades, but whether the patents at hand are abstract or not remains to be seen; this is not what patent maximalists claim it to be ("A Valentine for Software Patent Owners" or "valentine for patentee")



  8. An Indoctrinated Minority is Maintaining the Illusion That Patent Policy is to Blame for All or Most Problems of the United States

    The zealots who want to patent everything under the Sun and sue everyone under the Sun blame nations in the east (where the Sun rises) for all their misfortunes; this has reached somewhat ludicrous levels



  9. Berkheimer Decision is Still Being Spun by the Anti-Section 101/Alice Lobby

    12 days after Berkheimer v HP Inc. the patent maximalists continue to paint this decision as a game changer with regards to patent scope; the reality, however, is that this decision will soon be forgotten about and will have no substantial effect on either PTAB or Alice (because it's about neither of these)



  10. Academic Patent Immunity is Laughable and Academics Are Influenced by Corporate Money (for Steering Patent Agenda)

    Universities appear to have become battlegrounds in the war between practicing entities and a bunch of parasites who make a living out of litigation and patent bubbles



  11. UPC Optimism Languishes Even Among Paid UPC Propagandists Such as IAM

    Even voices which are attempting to give UPC momentum that it clearly lacks admit that things aren't looking well; the UK is not ratifying and Germany make take years to look into constitutional barriers



  12. Bejin Bieneman Props Up the Disgraced Randall Rader for Litigation Agenda

    Randall Rader keeps hanging out with the litigation 'industry' -- the very same 'industry' which he served in a closeted fashion when he was Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit (and vocal proponent of software patents, patent trolls and so on)



  13. With Stambler v Mastercard, Patent Maximalists Are Hoping to Prop Up Software Patents and Damage PTAB

    The patent 'industry' is hoping to persuade the highest US court to weaken the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB), for PTAB is making patent lawsuits a lot harder and raises the threshold for patent eligibility



  14. Apple Discovers That Its Patent Disputes Are a Losing Battle Which Only Lawyers Win (Profit From)

    By pouring a lot of money and energy into the 'litigation card' Apple lost focus and it's also losing some key cases, as its patents are simply not strong enough



  15. The Patent Microcosm Takes Berkheimer v HP Out of Context to Pretend PTAB Disregards Fact-Finding Process

    In view or in light of a recent decision (excerpt above), patent maximalists who are afraid of the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) try to paint it as inherently unjust and uncaring for facts



  16. Microsoft Has Left RPX, But RPX Now Pays a Microsoft Patent Troll, Intellectual Ventures

    The patent/litigation arms race keeps getting a little more complicated, as the 'arms' are being passed around to new and old entities that do nothing but shake-downs



  17. UPC Has Done Nothing for Europe Except Destruction of the EPO and Imminent Layoffs Due to Lack of Applications and Lowered Value of European Patents

    The Unified Patent Court (UPC) is merely a distant dream or a fantasy for litigators; to everyone else the UPC lobby has done nothing but damage, including potentially irreparable damage to the European Patent Office, which is declining very sharply



  18. Links 17/2/2018: Mesa 17.3.4, Wine 3.2, Go 1.10

    Links for the day



  19. Patent Trolls Are Thwarted by Judges, But Patent Lawyers View Them as a 'Business' Opportunity

    Patent lawyers are salivating over the idea that trolls may be coming to their state/s; owing to courts and the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) other trolls' software patents get invalidated



  20. Microsoft's Patent Moves: Dominion Harbor, Intellectual Ventures, Intellectual Discovery, NEC and Uber

    A look at some of the latest moves and twists, as patents change hands and there are still signs of Microsoft's 'hidden hand'



  21. Links 15/2/2018: GNOME 3.28 Beta, Rust 1.24

    Links for the day



  22. Bavarian State Parliament Has Upcoming Debate About Issues Which Can Thwart UPC for Good

    An upcoming debate about Battistelli's attacks on the EPO Boards of Appeal will open an old can of worms, which serves to show why UPC is a non-starter



  23. The EPO is Being Destroyed and There's Nothing Left to Replace It Except National Patent Offices

    It looks like Battistelli is setting up the European Patent Office (EPO) for mass layoffs; in fact, it looks as though he is so certain that the UPC will materialise that he obsesses over "validation" for mass litigation worldwide, departing from a "model office" that used to lead the world in terms of patent quality and workers' welfare/conditions



  24. IBM is Getting Desperate and Now Suing Microsoft Over Lost Staff, Not Just Suing Everyone Using Patents

    IBM's policy when it comes to patents, not to mention its alignment with patent extremists, gives room for thought if not deep concern; the company rapidly becomes more and more like a troll



  25. In Microsoft's Lawsuit Against Corel the Only Winner is the Lawyers

    The outcome of the old Microsoft v Corel lawsuit reaffirms a trend; companies with deep pockets harass their competitors, knowing that the legal bills are more cumbersome to the defendants; there's a similar example today in Cisco v Arista Networks



  26. The Latest Lies About Unitary Patent (UPC) and the EPO

    Lobbying defies facts; we are once again seeing some easily-debunked talking points from those who stand to benefit from the UPC and mass litigation



  27. Speech Deficit and No Freedom of Association at the EPO

    True information cannot be disseminated at the EPO and justice too is beyond elusive; this poses a threat to the EPO's future, not only to its already-damaged reputation



  28. No, Britain is Not Ratifying 'Unitary' Anything, But Team UPC Insinuates It Will (Desperate Effort to Affect Tomorrow's Outcome)

    Contrary to several misleading headlines from Bristows (in its blog and others'), the UPC isn't happening and isn't coming to the UK; it all amounts to lobbying (by setting false expectations)



  29. The EPO's Paid Promotion of Software Patents Gets Patent Maximalists All Excited and Emboldened

    The software patents advocacy from Battistelli (and his cohorts) isn't just a spit in the face of European Parliament but also the EPC; but patent scope seems to no longer exist or matter under his watch, as all he cares about is granting as many patents as possible, irrespective of real quality/legitimacy/merit



  30. Andrei Iancu Begins His USPTO Career While Former USPTO Director (and Now Paid Lobbyist) Keeps Meddling in Office Affairs

    The USPTO, which is supposed to be a government branch (loosely speaking) is being lobbied by former officials, who are now being paid by private corporations to help influence and shape policies; this damages the image of the Office and harms its independence from corporate influence


CoPilotCo

RSS 64x64RSS Feed: subscribe to the RSS feed for regular updates

Home iconSite Wiki: You can improve this site by helping the extension of the site's content

Home iconSite Home: Background about the site and some key features in the front page

Chat iconIRC Channel: Come and chat with us in real time

CoPilotCo

Recent Posts