"The question hinges on what royalties Microsoft (NasdaqGS:MSFT - News) may charge competitors for licensed access to its server protocols."
(< http://news.yahoo.com/s/bw/20070403/bs_bw/apr2007gb20070402569076 >)And the answer is nothing --nada; having coined the term "Web Services" carries the implicit notion that the organization of reference understands the inherent value of a decentralized network of networks (a.k.a., the Internet).
In other words, if the business entity of the topic uses the free and open Internet protocols to conduct its daily business, then likewise it should allow other entities free and unobstructed access to its purportedly "innovative" server protocols.
Unless, of course, the company of the topic, like the cracked egg of "Alice In Wonderland" (and the BusinessWeek columnist), actually spun their own peculiar definition that to the rest of interested parties is simply equivalent to "myWeb Services."
The European Union (EU) insistence on opening communication protocols at all levels showcases its commitment to enhanced competition (by the inclusion of all interested competing entities) and consequently promotes innovation by the multiplicity of players.
Quite possibly, taking a clue from the DOS-based WinXX "innovative" family of releases (at the operating system level until 2000), the EU decided that innovation, in the true sense of the word and in all aspects of technology, does not occur from Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (FUD) leveraged against the market by a single entity.
Notwithstanding, on a political level, it is not hard to deduce that the latter tactic is responsible for the absence of a collaborative framework in the world scene where one single entity attempts to impose its arbitrary and self-serving conditions upon others.