3 ms·
Do you know why that argument didn’t work for Microsoft? It’s not because they dominated Windows. They owned Windows, they could do what they wanted on Windows
by zaroth 6y ago
Do you know why that argument didn’t work for Microsoft?
It’s not because they dominated Windows. They owned Windows, they could do what they wanted on Windows, but for something very specific. In fact, it was a key element of the case that the government had to prove before they could proceed with proposing a remedy.
- GeekyBear 6y agoThat's not the thing that got Microsoft into trouble. >Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson issued his findings of fact on November 5, 1999, which stated that Microsoft's dominance of the x86-based personal computer operating systems market constituted a monopoly, and that Microsoft had taken actions to crush threats to that monopoly, including Apple, Java, Netscape, Lotus Software, RealNetworks, Linux, and others. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor.... It's the taking actions to crush threats to that monopoly part of the equation that got Microsoft into trouble.
- zaroth 6y agoYou need both things. You need a monopoly in a market, and you need to be using your monopoly position to crush your competition.