• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

Microsoft Antitrust Case Microsoft is a large diversified computer software manufacturer. Microsoft produces the Windows family of operating systems

Extracts from this document...

Introduction

Microsoft Antitrust Case Microsoft is a large diversified computer software manufacturer. Microsoft produces the Windows family of operating systems for personal computers and servers. It also produces applications software that run on the Windows family of operating systems, most notably the very successful MS-Office Suite consisting of Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Outlook and Access. Almost all Microsoft products are complementary to a member of the Windows family of operating systems for personal computers and servers. During the last few years, the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice of the United States have investigated Microsoft on various antitrust allegations. The 1991-1993 and 1993-1994 investigations by the Federal Trade Commission ended with no lawsuits. The 1994 investigation by the United States Department of Justice was terminated with a consent decree in 1995. The provisions of the 1995 consent decree were: 1. Microsoft agreed to end per-processor (zero marginal prices) contracts with computer manufacturers but it was allowed to use unrestricted quantity discounts. 2. Microsoft shall not enter into any License Agreement in which the terms of that agreement are expressly or implied conditioned upon the licensing of any other covered product, operating system software product or other product (provided, however, that this provision in and of itself shall not be construed to prohibit Microsoft from developing integrated products): or the original equipment manufacturers not licensing, purchasing, using or distributing and non-Microsoft product."1 This 1995 consent decree imposes two restrictions, one horizontal, and one vertical. The horizontal restriction stops Microsoft from using zero marginal cost pricing. However, it allows for quantity discounts, disregarding the fact that zero marginal cost pricing is a special case of a quantity discount contract. The vertical restriction of the decree prohibits product bundling created by contract, but allows Microsoft to keep expanding the number and type of functions of its products, including Windows. In this decree contractual bundling was not allowed, but technological bundling was allowed. ...read more.

Middle

The officials from these states communicated to Judge Posner that they would not sign such a deal. The judge was forced to declare the negotiations a failure. Given the proposals that the Government offered in the negotiations, there were expectations that the Department of Justice would demand more or less the same terms in the remedies phase. Instead, the Department of Justice asked for a much more radical step, the breakup of Microsoft. The judge adopted a remedy proposal that imposed the breakup of Microsoft into two "Baby Bills." There would be an operating systems company, which would inherit all the operating systems software, and an applications company with all the remaining software assets. The cash and security holds of other companies held by Microsoft would be split between the two entities. Bill Gates and other officers, shareholders of the company would not be allowed to hold executive and ownership positions in both of the companies. The District Court ruling also imposed interim conduct restrictions on Microsoft. The restrictions were to last three years, from the time of the breakup. The restrictions are as follows: 1. Microsoft would create a pricing schedule that would apply to all buyers so that price would not be conditioned on the sale of other Microsoft products. 2. Microsoft would not be allowed to have exclusive contracts that do not allow the other party to use, display, or feature it opponents' products. 3. APIs and other technical information of Windows should be shared with outsiders as it is shared within Microsoft. 4. Microsoft is not allowed to take actions against manufacturers who feature competitors' software. 5. Microsoft will allow OEMs to alter Windows in significant ways. 6. Microsoft is not allowed to design Windows to disable or compromise rivals' products. The above conditions were similar but more restrictive than the ones proposed by the government in the settlement talks at the end of March 2000. ...read more.

Conclusion

Is Microsoft good? Or is Microsoft bad? Well, the answer is a little bit of both. Even though the Justice Department found that Microsoft might be practicing some techniques that are less than ethical, they did not find that Microsoft was breaking any anti-trust laws, nor did Microsoft actually admit to the accusations when they signed the agreement. If anything, them signing the agreement was more of a sorry than a full-fledged admission of guilt. Other people might disagree with me, and there might be a lot of allegations floating around from different companies, but the fact of the matter is plain and simple. Microsoft has not been formerly charged and found guilty of an illegal practices pertaining to them being a monopoly. When considering whether a monopoly should persist or not the factors must be examined closely. Whether or not the consumers are being exploited is something that is essential when contemplating the breakup of a monopolistic firm. Often times, and in the case of Microsoft, the consumers benefit from the monopoly. After more than three years of litigation, repeated courtroom setbacks and failed settlement talks, Microsoft emerged largely successful from its long antitrust battle. Microsoft's agreement with the Justice Department does not require it to alter the design or development of its products and will not change Microsoft's strategy of aggressively moving into new markets. While Microsoft may be limiting its competition, it is aiding the consumer. For it is able to charge a lower price and produce more efficiently because of smaller costs that if it existed in a purely competitive industry. Microsoft is not the stereotypical monopoly, in that it continues to innovate, which explains the upgrades to its present software. It would not be right to break-up this firm, for its existence is beneficial to the public. Regulatory action may be needed though in order to provide competitors with more of a fighting chance. Competition still exists though and in the unpredictable industry of technology a firm can plummet and rise swiftly. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Machinery of Justice section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Machinery of Justice essays

  1. The Canadian Justice system towards aboriginal offenders

    on an unusual journey".14 The journey taken in the Moses case involved an unprecedented degree of aboriginal community involvement and input in the sentencing procedure. The sentencing circle represented a manifest attempt to conceive of a sentence within the framework of restorative justice while eliminating the adversarial environment of a courtroom setting.

  2. English legal system

    They submitted that the grounds had been fully met via the conduct of the respondents and their associates and so in the interests of the public, SHAT would be better served re-letting the property. The appellants then brought forth the argument that an appeal judge could only interfere on a point of law in such a case as this.

  1. George Bush – Analysis of a political speech.

    The topicality then shifts towards the casualties. The semantic field of large quantities exaggerates the number of victims for example in paragraph 15 where he uses the words dozens, hundreds and more than two hundred and fifty.

  2. I will look at different black theologies and different theories of justice, and attempt ...

    The individualistic nature is not really fulfilled in the justification of why society's laws ought to be altered. It is the intrinsically self-preservatory nature of individuals that causes a desire of why society's laws ought to be changed, and black people want this.

  1. The European Court of Justice ensures that European law is applied throughout the member ...

    even though she had no such right under the UK equal pay legislation passed in 1970, before the UK joined the European Union. The last type of European law are in the form of directives, they are less precisely worded than regulations because they aim to set out clear objectives

  2. Balancing Competing Interests

    In contrast, Rewards may be attached to desirable behaviour to encourage the individual to set aside his own interests and act in the public interest. This is illustrated in the case of R v Craig where the judge ordered a reward of �500 to be given from public funds to

  1. Policing Using New Technologies

    They were also found to be cheaper to maintain, ?These weapons save lives. We never said they were toys? (Scipione. A., 2012). Adverse effects were also observed with increased incidents of injuries and deaths due to their inappropriate use and the cases of abuses by police of firing them at

  2. Expert Testimony and Its Value In the Justice System

    This is similar to the system which is currently used and therefore carries with it many of the current issues. The best option would perhaps be for both tests to be used in such a way that the exact definition of an expert would be clear, but the system would no longer be open to abuse by individuals.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work