As has been widely reported (see this), Microsoft's appeal of the European Commission's decision failed. This story in BusinessWeek and this one in the NY Times begin to contemplate some of the longer term consequences of this decsion beyond Microsoft.
Some of the other cases mentioned involve Qualcomm and other firms that have technologies that are either de facto or de jure standards. If the markets that these firms compete in benefit from standards, should the firms whose technology has been adopted by the marketplace be subject to government scrutiny or intervention? Should a de jure process exempt firms from this?
More broadly, how much should the government manage competition? Do consumers benefit from this kind of intervention? What should be the standard for determining "successful" government intervention?
Update (2007-09-18): Here is an analysis from TLF.
Update (2007-09-21): I found this item to be a worthwhile read. Do you agree or disagree?
Update (2007-09-25): This article suggests that smaller companies may begin "venue shopping" in the EU in order to gain favorable rulings. Is this a good development?
Update (2007-09-26): This item is critical of the EU ruling, and frames the Antitrust fine as a tariff that bypasses the WTO. Do you think this has merit?