Seems to me that Sun will continue to bleed to death in regards to its customers jumping ship everyday to vendors like IBM, and HP, while Oracle and the EC go to war over the fate of MySQL. This can't be a good thing in the short to medium term for Sun. What if the EC just totally objects to the takeover? http://news.cnet.com/8301-30685_3-10393740-264.html?tag=newsLatestHeadlinesArea.0

Can anyone point me to an explanation of what power the EC has in this situation and where it derives that power?

Can anyone point me to an explanation of what power the EC has in this situation and where it derives that power?

Maybe because Oracle operates/sells in Europe too.

Can anyone point me to an explanation of what power the EC has in this situation and where it derives that power?

the EC enforces antitrust legislation on the European (EU) level for all its (currently 27) member states. this is not too dissimilar to how federal US antitrust law is regulated. since both Oracle and MySQL are already dominant players in the database software market in Europe (as they are in the USA, of course), antitrust considerations are definitely an issue - in this case from a European perspective. i'm not saying that any of this actually makes any sense from a wider perspective (especially since MySQL is open source), but if you take legal matters seriously (as the EC by definition must) then these proceedings are a logical conclusion. it must be said that the reverse (US courts ruling over European companies because they do business in the USA) happens all the time. international law is a weird playground... cheers, gerald http://www.gerald-loeffler.net

Can anyone point me to an explanation of what power the EC has in this situation and where it derives that power?

the EC enforces antitrust legislation on the European (EU) level for all its (currently 27) member states. this is not too dissimilar to how federal US antitrust law is regulated.

Both Sun and Oracle are incorporated in the US, correct? I guess I'm trying to understand where they legal authority comes from. If two European companies want to merge, does the US get the option to veto that? P.S. Please, everyone, don't read into this. I am asking a question. Not questioning.

If two European companies want to merge, does the US get the option to veto that?

yes - if they are doing business in the USA.

I guess I'm trying to understand where they legal authority comes from.

i guess it's because both Oracle and Sun are incorporated in all European countries. For instance, when i was employed by Sun my contract was with an Austrian legal entity called the "Sun Microsystems GmbH". The UK subsidiary of Sun would have a UK-specific suffix, and so on. I suppose if neither Sun nor Oracle had any offices in the EU (just shipped there products to the EU and had them sold through independent resellers) then the EC would have no say in the merger. i'll go back to Scala now - somehow there's more truth in that ;-) cheers, gerald

I suppose if neither Sun nor Oracle had any offices in the EU (just shipped there products to the EU and had them sold through independent resellers) then the EC would have no say in the merger.

That would imply that Oracle could just keep a European subsidiary called Sun-EC or whatever and be fine. If you look at the link above, there is a treaty that covers mergers.

Gee - what a surprise. They object to all US mergers, don't they?

With this it's clear that Oracle really wants MySql more than anything else. Sun's purchasing MySql so Oracle could purchase Sun may have just been Oracle's way to get MySql in a way that the regulators might have allowed.

With this it's clear that Oracle really wants MySql more than anything else. Sun's purchasing MySql so Oracle could purchase Sun may have just been Oracle's way to get MySql in a way that the regulators might have allowed.

So Oracle directed Sun to purchase (overpay for!) MySql just so they could slip by regulators at some later date? That's quite a theory. However, I'm sure that when Sun bought MySql the potential strategic value to an acquirer such as Oracle was indeed part of the equation. Stan

With this it's clear that Oracle really wants MySql more than anything else. Sun's purchasing MySql so Oracle could purchase Sun may have just been Oracle's way to get MySql in a way that the regulators might have allowed.

So Oracle directed Sun to purchase (overpay for!) MySql just so they could slip by regulators at some later date? That's quite a theory.

However, I'm sure that when Sun bought MySql the potential strategic value to an acquirer such as Oracle was indeed part of the equation.

Stan

Oracle claims that they can't really control MySql because it is open source. Again, I'm a little unclear on all the legalities of this. Seems pretty complicated. Even the people involved can't seem to agree on the basic facts. It's not surprising given how the legal implications of different open source licenses are so poorly understood.

With this it's clear that Oracle really wants MySql more than anything else. Sun's purchasing MySql so Oracle could purchase Sun may have just been Oracle's way to get MySql in a way that the regulators might have allowed.

So Oracle directed Sun to purchase (overpay for!) MySql just so they could slip by regulators at some later date? That's quite a theory.

However, I'm sure that when Sun bought MySql the potential strategic value to an acquirer such as Oracle was indeed part of the equation.

Stan

Oracle claims that they can't really control MySql because it is open source. Again, I'm a little unclear on all the legalities of this. Seems pretty complicated. Even the people involved can't seem to agree on the basic facts. It's not surprising given how the legal implications of different open source licenses are so poorly understood.

I know little/nothing about international law, but the authority problem doesn't appear that hard to me. The EC has the authority to regulate commerce in its member nations. Of course the EC can't veto the merger in the US, but it can keep them from doing business in the EC if they violate its decisions. So the merger wouldn't happen if Oracle was suddenly banned from the EC. Stan

The EC has the authority to regulate commerce in its member nations. Of course the EC can't veto the merger in the US, but it can keep them from doing business in the EC if they violate its decisions. So the merger wouldn't happen if Oracle was suddenly banned from the EC.

Stan

That should read (EC vs EU): The EC has the authority to regulate commerce in its member nations. Of course the EC can't veto the merger in the US, but it can keep them from doing business in the EU if they violate its decisions. So the merger wouldn't happen if Oracle was suddenly banned from the EU. Stan

I know little/nothing about international law, but the authority problem doesn't appear that hard to me.

The EC has the authority to regulate commerce in its member nations. Of course the EC can't veto the merger in the US, but it can keep them from doing business in the EC if they violate its decisions. So the merger wouldn't happen if Oracle was suddenly banned from the EC.

Stan

I didn't say it was hard. I wasn't looking for guesses. I can guess all on my own. I considered the above but consider the implications of this. Assume that Oracle and Sun merge anyway and the EC bans them. Now all their customers in Europe (i.e. European companies) can no longer get support or upgrades for their software and hardware. That would seem to be cutting off your nose to spite your face. Sure it would a gamble on Oracles part but if EU call their bluff it would be really bad for both of them. Maybe that's what's happening but I'd like to know instead of just making assumptions.

They could allow Oracle to fulfill existing contracts but ban them from new sales. When you are the government you can do whatever you want as long as you stay in power. Stan

They could allow Oracle to fulfill existing contracts but ban them from new sales. When you are the government you can do whatever you want as long as you stay in power.

Stan

http://ec.europa.eu/competition/international/bilateral/usa.html

I am sure this issue can be resolved. If MySQL is causing this blockade, I am amazed way EC/EU thinks. I believe there is quite a competition for MySQL as well as Oracle databases. My guess is EC/EU has more deeper reasons or vested interests for the same. One reason can be to get some concessions from Oracle. http://sec.gov/Archives/edgar/data/709519/000118143109050589/rrd256710.htm