Re: [PLUG] MS Outlaws? (was Fwd: CG: Windows XP warning)

[Sam Hunting <sam_hunting@yahoo.com>]

> Message: 4
> Date: Sat, 16 Feb 2002 20:29:36 -0500 (EST)
> From: Jon Galt <jongalt@pinn.net>
> To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
> Subject: Re: [PLUG] MS Outlaws? (was Fwd: CG: Windows XP warning)
> Reply-To: plug@lists.phillylinux.org
> 
> On Wed, 13 Feb 2002, gabriel rosenkoetter wrote:
> 
> > > On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 10:03:24PM -0500, Jon Galt wrote:
> > > Well you make a good argument that MS did not contribute to cheap
> > > hardware - of course I was leaning that way anyhow.  But what is
> > > this about Microsoft "breaking the law"?
> > 
> > Your disagreement with anti-trust laws doesn't make them go away.
> 
> Granted.
> 
> To be honest, I pay little attention to governmental attacks on
> private companies - as well as government giving private companies 
> advantages over their competitors.  I'm sure Micro$oft has been on
the
> receiving end of both of these things.
> 
> I was under the impression that MS legal troubles, convictions, or
> whatever had been overturned.  Judicial orders rescinded, or
> whatever. Can someone point me to a quick rundown of the events?

Wayne:

Here's a useful site:

    http://www.guardian.co.uk/microsoft

Did MS break the law? Yes.

    http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/ms-conclusions.html

    Upon consideration of the Court's Findings of Fact ...the proposed 
    conclusions of law submitted by the parties, the briefs of amici 
    curiae, and the argument of counsel thereon, the Court concludes 
    that Microsoft maintained its monopoly power by anticompetitive 
    means and attempted to monopolize the Web browser market, both in
    violation of § 2. Microsoft also violated § 1 of the Sherman Act by

    unlawfully tying its Web browser to its operating system.

Like Wayne, I don't keep track of all the detail -- EXCEPT when it
affects me personally, which MS did. From the Findings of Fact:

    http://usvms.gpo.gov/ms-findings2.html

    411. Many of the tactics that Microsoft has employed have also 
    harmed consumers indirectly by unjustifiably distorting
competition. 
    The actions that Microsoft took against Navigator hobbled a form of

    innovation that had shown the potential to DEPRESS THE APPLICATIONS

    BARRIER TO ENTRY SUFFICIENTLY TO ENABLE OTHER FIRMS TO COMPETE 
    EFFECTIVELY AGAINST MICROSOFT IN THE MARKET FOR INTEL-COMPATIBLE 
    PC OPERATING SYSTEMS. THAT COMPETITION WOULD HAVE CONDUCED TO 
    CONSUMER CHOICE AND NURTURED INNOVATION. [capitals mine]

The findings of fact (harm to consumers, ie, me) and the findings of
law (illegal exercise of monopoly power) have not been overturned. What
is at issue is the penalty of MS's actions. In that sense, MS's
troubles may be said to be at an end, as the current Justice Department
(though not some states) is willing to settle for weak penalties. 

S.





=====
<!-- www.etopicality.com 
     www.goose-works.org 

"A human is a topic map's way of making another topic map."

-->

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Sports - Coverage of the 2002 Olympic Games
http://sports.yahoo.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