Why did Microsoft not have to publish the protocol for Skype?
<p>Microsoft was forced to <a href="https://fsfe.org/activities/ms-vs-eu/timeline.en.html" rel="nofollow noreferrer">publish its protocols</a> in 2007 as a result of the <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Corp_v_Commission" rel="nofollow noreferrer">competition case</a> brought by the European Commission.  These are available at Microsoft's <a href="https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/dd208104.aspx" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Open Specifications</a> page including, for example, "<a href="https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc233855.aspx" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Kerberos Protocol Extensions</a>" and "<a href="https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc313133(v=office.12).aspx" rel="nofollow noreferrer">Excel Binary File Format</a>".</p>

<p>In 2011 Microsoft <a href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Skype#Microsoft_acquisition" rel="nofollow noreferrer">bought</a> Skype, which they used to replace Messenger and Lync.</p>

<p>Why did they not have to publish the Skype protocol?</p>

<p>Because <a href="http://www.protocolfreedom.org/PFIF_agreement.pdf" rel="noreferrer">the agreement</a> covers the IP relating to a specific list of file-sharing, printer-sharing, and user-management protocols (the <a href="https://msdn.microsoft.com/library/gg285297.aspx" rel="noreferrer">Workgroup Server Protocol Program</a>) — basically, things relating to Samba — and not everything that Microsoft ever did or ever will do.</p>

european-union competition