" In 1999 the European Commission was accused of fraud, nepotism and mismanagement. Corruption, endemic in bureaucracies, is a problem: A 144-page report documented the charges, and the entire Commission got the boot. The report noted that one commissioner had put her dentist on the payroll as an AIDS researcher.
“Meet Your New Advisory Board”
wired.com
If the link doesn’t work, go to wired.com and then Archives and April 9, 2001 issue.
“Corruption, endemic in bureaucracies, is another problem” (for the EU)
The US does not have a monopoly on corrupt government agencies.
Re your naïve assumption<<The countries and the president cooperate in finding the right people.>>
oops… Guess those were the wrong EU commissioners in 1999 but the right commissioners now? Right?
Wired magazine says this “cleansing” of the EU Commission in ’99 didn’t mean it became more democratic; it is still subject to backroom deal making. Their “socialist backgrounds lead them to adopt the coercive methods of Marxist governments” to ensure “competition.” “They're not beholden to anyone, and they really resent American dominance."
Re: another incorrect assumption “It's a lot of restrictions on the companies, but they know precisely under which rules they operate, and it gives end-users a lot of freedom and choice."
yeah, right…... Although the EU claims they want to ensure competition; their definition of competition keeps changing and European companies don't know what the rules are, anymore than American companies do. Till a few years ago, the EU encouraged strong “national champions” like SAP and Nokia. These champions were given large government grants and other subsidies. Then "national champions" went out of favor as antitrust doctrine; and theories of “collective dominance” or multi-competitors became the norm. In 1996, the EU Commission blocked a merger that would have left two competitors in the platinum industry; later it vetoed a deal that would have left only three big UK tour operators; last year they opposed Time Warner-EMI merger, saying only four competitors would remain.
“AOL-Time Warner and Time Warner-EMI merger participants before the EU: "You'd say, 'What if we did this?' and never get a straight answer. Even if the answer is no, you're better off knowing the rules of the road than being in this foggy thing, trying to feel your way around." (from Wired 4/9/2001)
Isn't Vivendi a European company? Messier, CEO of Vivendi, was surprised at the “rules under which the EU operates” saying "I've been obliged to give up too much to get the green light.” Messier said "the divestment was not an obvious request...on the business side it didn't make sense" (It only made sense to Vivendi’s competitors- the probably source of the suggestions) …. Messier said “EU rules 'can't remain like this for too long.” "Vivendi CEO: EU Competition Body should ease M&A rules. Dow Jones 7/4/2001
In the US and Europe, companies don’t know the rules till they are accused of violating them. “There is no agreement on the definition of important terms like “competition, monopoly, market power." Companies find out if they are considered a monopoly in violation of antitrust laws only after they are hauled into court for an investigation or trial instigated by competitors. Partisan economists, lawyers, and partisan political appointees at the DOJ or FTC, and Federal judges with no training in business or economics decide their fate and whether they should be held liable for billions of dollars in treble damages.
As Judge Posner says, government agencies and Federal judges don't have the capability of dealing with complex antitrust cases; involving complex technical issues; intellectual property, network externalities, and rapid consumer growth. They rely on expert witnesses, and Posner is concerned about the scarcity of uninterested technical experts.
Posner is very aware that State Attorney Generals are influenced by constituents in their home state. "States are too subject to influence by interest groups that may represent a potential antitrust defendant's competitors. Posner says: This is a particular concern where the defendant is located in one state and one of its competitors in another; and the competitor, who is pressing his states attorney general to bring suit, is a major political force in that state." (euphemism for large financial contributions). "A situation in which the benefits of government action are concentrated in one state and the costs in other states is a recipe for irresponsible state action." Amen
Unfortunately Posner believes that Federal Agencies like the DOJ and FTC are little influenced by special interest groups. HAH! Would someone like to send Judge Posner a copy of Wired Magazine from November 8, 2000. The Appeals Court Judges should read it as well. They all seemed to have been influenced with the theories of Dennis Carlton in their decisions. Carlton, a well respected economist and Professor of Economics at the University of Chicago was one of the original participants in the "Sherman Project," according to John Heilemann, author of
"The Truth, The Whole Truth, and Nothing But The Truth" November 8, 2000
wired.com
re your comment: "The laws in Europe still vary a lot. Germany is a lot like USA and has a lot of lawyers and a lot of judges, unlike Denmark, where law-suits are seldom in business.”
Germany has laws, like most civilized countries. Laws are laws. But Monti ignores laws, even European laws, as shown by Monti's recent actions towards IMS. Monti totally disregarded and violated a German court’s orders by ordering IMS, an American company, to license their copyrighted system to two competitors, an American and a Belgian company. IMS had sued two competitors in a Frankfurt Germany court, alleging they had infringed IMS' copyright system of collecting data. A German court had ruled decisively in IMS favor and barred the two competitors from using IMS system or anything similar. The competitors ran crying to the EU. Super Mario gave IMS just two weeks to come up with a commercial license for the competitors "or else a mediator would be chosen to impose "commercially reasonable terms."
biz.yahoo.com
Monti and the EU are becoming too powerful and it looks like there is nothing to restrain them. It is not reassuring either that the EU, DOJ, and FTC have collaborated in the past and that Bush is planning on doing so in the future. Monti says the EU actions against IMS are rare "There are exceptional circumstances that justify taking interim measures and ordering a license -- a step which is and will remain rare."
Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain of the U.K. naively believed Hitler's claim in September 1938: “This is the last territorial claim I shall make in Europe.”
Monti said that IMS's refusal to grant a license to competitors to use its system, which had become a national standard in the German pharmaceutical industry ``constitutes a prima facie abuse of a dominant position.'' Is that what he will say to Microsoft when and if he orders them to reveal their source code for their server software FOB of McSquealey? |
