Re: [PLUG] OT, "monopoly"

[Art Alexion <arthur@alexion.com>]

Michael Leone wrote:

> On 26 Apr 2002 at 12:57, Jon Galt wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 26 Apr 2002, Kyle R . Burton wrote:
> >
> > > I keep posting this stuff to PLUG in the hopes that it will at least
> > > raise awareness of what's happening in the minds of PLUG members.
> > > My hope is that as a group, we will are (or will be) in a position
> > > to influence things for the better - but we need to know what's
> > > going on, and a little prodding never hurts.
> >
> > I agree.  It just irritates me when people refer to Microsloth as a
> > "monopoly", and claim that they don't have a right to run their
> > business the way they want to.
>
> They *are* a monolpoly, as was determined by the court, and affirmed
> on appeal. Being a monopoly is *not* illegal; abusing your
> monopolistic power *is*. And so they *don't* have a right to run
> their business any way they want; they did run it the way they
> wanted, and that way was found to be illegal.
>
> The breakup part of the remedy solution was the part thrown out, not
> the fact that they were guilty.

Haven't we all written this same chapter before?

For some people, reality is what they want to believe.  No one else can 
change that.

Last time we took it off list.  Probably remains a good idea.

_____________________________

art alexion
mailto:arthur@alexion.com

______________________________________________________________________
Philadelphia Linux Users Group       -      http://www.phillylinux.org
Announcements-http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug-announce
General Discussion  -  http://lists.phillylinux.org/mail/listinfo/plug