Congress: Clear the Air and Stop Preloads

LXer Day Desk: 12-16-2005 American consumers do not like living in the dark when it comes to products we buy. In that respect, we don't believe citizens of other countries do either. So, with consideration to the people who drive the US economy, we would like some straight answers to questions which should shine some light on an area of darkness with which we lived far too long. 1. Does the US Administration lobby on behalf of Microsoft and if so should it cease and desist from such activity? 2. We ask Congress to evaluate the administration's role with regard to Microsoft's monopoly. 3. We ask Congress and the President to prohibit Microsoft preloading agreements. 4. We ask for Congress to perform a comprehensive review of Microsoft's political activities including and starting with the House Ethics committee's failure to investigate the links between Tom DeLay, Jack Abramoff, Preston Gates &Ellis and the BSA. 5. We request Congress to enact laws requiring Original Equipment Manufacturers to disclose their policies with regard to selling Microsoft products. 6. We ask for schedules of payments to and from Microsoft and OEMs be disclosed immediately to the public so we can ascertain the influence exerted on consumers buying computers and computer related products.

Consumer consumption determines the health of the US Economy. Some of us would prefer a return to manufacturing, distribution, exports and technological innovations. But poor decisions in the past have painted us into this corner.

As consumers, we need more information about the products we buy. Today, for example, we know about the employee discounts for most automobile manaufacturers. We know a lot more about the availability of generic drugs versus name brand drugs whose patents have run out.

Now, we believe we need to know more about the computer systems offered to us in stores and off web sites. So, we believe consumer advocates should lobby for a small set of simple requests with regard to the US computer industry as it affects consumers.

Gives us the answers to these six questions or requests discussed below:



1. Does the US Administration lobby on behalf of Microsoft and if so should it cease and desist from such activity?



In particular, we feel courious as to why the US Justice Department lobbied on behave of Micrsoft when the South Korea found Microsoft guilty of anti-trust. In an article entitled U.S. Wades Into Korea's Microsoft Controversy Chosun.com states:

The U.S. Justice Department on Wednesday took the unusual step of sharply criticizing a decision by Korea’s Fair Trade Commission to fine Microsoft W33 billion (US$33 million) in an antitrust case, which it said went “beyond what is necessary or appropriate.”



(It went on to say)

FTC director-general Kim Byung Bae said it was rare for the U.S. Justice Department to issue a statement on the matter since it was customary to respect decisions by partnering institutions. That was why the Korean government made no comment on a recent decision by the department to fine Samsung Electronics for price-fixing, Kim said. Asked if the U.S. statement could lead to a full-scale trade war, Kim said the FTC decision was based solely on whether Microsoft violated antitrust law or not, so it was not a trade issue.

The judge found it odd that Justice initiated a massive antitrust probe, found significant violations in the large market and only wrote a complaint alleging minor anticompetitive practices.

He felt the decree didn't work in the public interest because: 1) It declined to provide the Court with the information it needed to make a proper determination. 2) The scope of the decree was too narrow. 3) The parties did not address other anticompetitive practices. 4) The Court was not satisfied that enforcement and compliance mechanisms were satisfactory.

While we can see the power of preloading an operating system today, we didn't think much about it in 1992. Today, 95% of the people who own computers use what comes on their PCs.



Preload agreements seemed like a clever marketing tool. In the least they gave someone an edge. At the other end of the spectrum under the Sherman and Clayton acts they should be potentially felonious.



Back when these agreements started, preloads gave OEM's a good price on DOS. But OEMs had to agree to buy Windows, too. They would have to pay for DOS and Windows for every computer they shipped, whether DOS and Windows were on it or not.