Pulitzer Road
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| garyedwards Jan 10, 2006 2:21 PM EDT |
Great work Tom! The more you write about this, the more clear, direct and factually forceful your arguments have become. I really appreciate the 30,000 foot view you've provided. Has anyone done a comparative study using Judge Jackson's "findings of fact" delineating the mash of MS violations and illegal activities, and contrasting it to MS actions today? Microsoft was found guilty of illegally establishing and maintaining a monopoly. But isn't one of the primary reasons for the Sherman Anti - Trust law a concern that once a monopoly is established, the monopolist not be able to leverage that power and extend the monopolist influence into other markets? Regardless of whether or not the monopoly was illegally established? Judge Jackson's structural solution was assurance that Microsoft would not be able to unduly extend their monopolistic influence. The DOJ - Judge Colleen settlement dismisses these concerns. Yet, that is exactly what we're now seeing; Microsoft using the desktop monopoly base to push their way into server side markets, device markets, multi media markets, and near anything having to do with the Open Internet. The European's look to be serious about preventing this expansion, demanding that Microsoft disclose the interfaces and protocols used to integrate and make interoperable and connect desktops to servers and devices. That this is explicitly defined by the Sherman Anti Trust Laws, and cannot be separated from the findings that Microsoft is a monopolist is something that should be basic to enforcing the laws of the land. So where is the DOJ? And where's Judge Colleen? Have they been Abramof'd too? ~ge~ |
| tadelste Jan 10, 2006 2:30 PM EDT |
Quoting:But isn't one of the primary reasons for the Sherman Anti - Trust law a concern that once a monopoly is established, the monopolist not be able to leverage that power and extend the monopolist influence into other markets? Regardless of whether or not the monopoly was illegally established? That's my understanding and why I suggested that the DoJ enforce the law. Quoting:So where is the DOJ? And where's Judge Colleen? Have they been Abramof'd too?That's what I keep asking. Do you think seeing the "Get the facts" ads in the article might prompt someone to show them around the Hoover Building? |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!