Microsoft charged with EU antitrust violations for bundling Teams

Microsoft in the EU Crosshairs: Antitrust Charges Over Teams Bundling

The tech giant Microsoft has once again found itself under the scrutiny of European Union regulators. After 15 years of relative peace, the company faces antitrust charges for its alleged illegal bundling of the Teams collaboration app with its Office 365 and Microsoft 365 subscription suites. This development marks the latest chapter in a long-standing debate over the balance between market competition and the power of tech giants.

A Familiar Story: Bundling and Antitrust

The EU’s concerns stem from the practice of tying, where a company bundles a product or service with another, often more popular one. This practice can stifle competition by giving the bundled product an unfair advantage, limiting consumer choice, and ultimately hindering innovation within the market.

Microsoft’s history with antitrust investigations is not a new one. The company previously faced hefty fines and regulatory intervention for similar practices in the past. The most prominent examples include:

• 2004: The EU ordered Microsoft to offer a version of Windows without Media Player bundled, leading to the Windows XP N version exclusively available in EU markets.
• 2009: Microsoft was forced to implement a browser ballot box in its Windows operating system, ensuring users could choose from multiple web browsers after years of forcibly bundling Internet Explorer with Windows.
• 2013: Microsoft was fined $730 million for failing to include the browser ballot in Windows 7 SP1.

These past experiences highlight the EU’s commitment to maintaining a competitive market and preventing dominant tech players from leveraging their power to stifle innovation.

The EU’s Concerns: Teams’ Gain, Competitors’ Loss?

In the case of Teams, the EU Commission is concerned that Microsoft may be giving its own communication product an unfair edge over competitors by tying it to its popular productivity suites. "We are concerned that Microsoft may be giving its own communication product Teams an undue advantage over competitors, by tying it to its popular productivity suites for businesses," stated Margrethe Vestager, the head of competition policy in Europe.

The Commission believes that by automatically including Teams in these subscriptions, Microsoft may be limiting customers’ ability to choose competing communication platforms and potentially forcing them to pay for a product they might not use or want.

Slack’s Complaint: The Catalyst for Investigation

The current investigation was triggered by a complaint filed by Slack, a rival collaboration platform, in July 2020. Slack’s original complaint alleged that Microsoft "illegally tied" its Microsoft Teams product to Office and was "force installing it for millions, blocking its removal, and hiding the true cost to enterprise customers."

Slack argued that Microsoft’s bundling strategy gave Teams an unfair advantage, limiting the appeal of Slack’s own offering and ultimately hindering their ability to compete effectively in the market.

Microsoft’s Response: Unbundling but Not Enough

In response to the EU’s investigation and mounting concerns, Microsoft took steps to unbundle Teams from Office, first in Europe and later globally. The company separated Teams into its own standalone app, seemingly aiming to appease regulators and demonstrate its commitment to market competition.

However, these unbundling efforts appear to have been insufficient to avoid formal charges. "Having unbundled Teams and taken initial interoperability steps, we appreciate the additional clarity provided today and will work to find solutions to address the Commission’s remaining concerns," stated Microsoft president Brad Smith in a statement to the Financial Times.

The Stakes are High: Potential Fines and Remedies

The potential outcome of the EU investigation could prove costly for Microsoft. If found guilty of antitrust violations, the company could face a hefty fine of up to 10 percent of its annual worldwide turnover. Additionally, the European Commission could impose remedies, compelling Microsoft to alter its software products. These remedies could take various forms, including:

• Offering a version of Office without Teams bundled: This would allow businesses to choose their preferred communication platform separate from their productivity suites.
• Making it easier for users to switch to competing communication platforms: This could involve making Teams’ functionality interoperable with other platforms or providing clear and simple instructions on how to remove Teams from Office.
• Providing greater transparency about the cost of Teams: This could involve clearly outlining the cost of Teams within Office subscriptions and allowing businesses to easily opt out of the service.

The Future of Collaboration and Competition

The outcome of the EU investigation will have significant implications for the future of collaboration software and the broader tech landscape. A strong stance by the EU could set a precedent for how tech giants are held accountable for their actions and serve as a warning to others who may engage in similar practices.

The investigation also raises important questions about the balance between innovation and market competition. While bundling can offer convenience and integration for users, it can also stifle competition and limit consumer choice. The EU’s focus on ensuring a level playing field is crucial for fostering innovation and ensuring that consumers have access to the best products and services.

The decision to charge Microsoft with antitrust violations signals a renewed commitment from the EU to regulating the tech industry and ensuring fair competition. It remains to be seen how the investigation will unfold and what consequences Microsoft will face. However, the case serves as a reminder that even tech giants are not exempt from accountability when it comes to market competition and consumer welfare.

Article Reference