TCLUG Archive
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Microsoft Antitrust Issues
- To: 425@startribune.com, 55488@startribune.com, AS.@startribune.com, Av.@startribune.com, MN@startribune.com, Mpls.@startribune.com, Portland@startribune.com, coverct@gw.startribune.com, jaymz@acm.cs.umn.edu, jstern@citilink.com, sigfs@acm.cs.umn.edu, tclug-list@listserv.real-time.com
- Subject: Microsoft Antitrust Issues
- From: Josh Stern <jstern@citilink.com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 16:14:13 -0500 (CDT)
- Posted-Date: Wed, 10 Jun 1998 16:14:13 -0500 (CDT)
p.s. sorry for the resend - some of the previous
mail bounced due to extra-line before subject heading.
Regarding, Microsoft and anti-trust, please look at
this information:
http://www.essential.org/antitrust/ms/jun3survey.html
This is about how consumers are not only not given any
choice of OS when they buy and X86 compatible machine,
but they also have to pay a Microsoft tax whether they
want MS-Windows or not.
Frankly, I don't know enough about anti-trust law to
say whether Microsoft's contracts with OEMs that lead
to this behavior are illegal. But it seems like
common sense that they *should be* illegal.
If they are not, then Microsoft is just exploiting
a loophole in the law that permists other, more
legitimate business practices. This survey shows
that the previous DOJ/Microsoft agreement to end
per-processor licensing was a complete farce.
Microsoft has found other types of contracts that
have the exact same effect.
- Josh
jstern@citilink.com
josh@pet.med.va.gov