Microsoft: Difference between revisions

Line 31:

In the case ''United States v.'' Microsoft Corp'''''.''','' 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000),<ref>[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/87/30/2307082/ "United States v. Microsoft Corp., 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000)"] - law.justia.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> Microsoft's conduct taken as a whole was described as a "deliberate assault upon entrepreneurial efforts that, could well have enabled the introduction of competition into the market for [[Intel]]-compatible PC operating systems". Further, "Microsoft's anti-competitive actions trammeled the competitive process through which the computer software industry generally stimulates innovation and conduces to the optimum benefit of consumers."

====Anticompetitive Practices revealed in this Lawsuit====

====Summary of Anticompetitive Practices revealed in this Lawsuit====

*~~'''Delaying competitors'''~~

:* Intentionally slowing development of rival products like IBM and Apple through contractual or technical barriers.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2002-01-25 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171115104834/https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |archive-date=2017-11-15 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=justice.gov |publisher=U.S. Department Of Justice}}</ref>

:Intentionally slowing development of rival products like IBM and Apple through contractual or technical barriers.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2002-01-25 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171115104834/https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |archive-date=2017-11-15 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=justice.gov |publisher=U.S. Department Of Justice}}</ref>

:* Overcharging consumers by $20–30 billion for Windows licenses in the 1990s by hiding costs in PC bundles.<ref name=":0" />

:* Deliberately degrading interoperability of competing software (e.g., Java, ''Netscape'') with Windows. <ref name=":0" />

*~~'''Artificial price inflation'''~~

:* Blocking rivals' distribution channels by signing exclusive deals with PC manufacturers and ISPs. <ref name=":0" />

:Overcharging consumers by $20–30 billion for Windows licenses in the 1990s by hiding costs in PC bundles.<ref name=":0" />

*~~'''Sabotaging competitors'''~~

:Deliberately degrading interoperability of competing software (e.g., Java, ''Netscape'') with Windows. <ref name=":0" />

*~~'''Exclusionary contracts'''~~

:Blocking rivals' distribution channels by signing exclusive deals with PC manufacturers and ISPs. <ref name=":0" />

===Microsoft Corp. v Commission of the European Communities (2004-2007)===

Faced EU penalties for bundling ''Media Player'' and ''IE''<ref>{{Cite web |date=2007-09-17 |title=EUR-Lex - 62004TJ0201 - Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Grand Chamber) of 17 September 2007. Microsoft Corp. v Commission of the European Communities. |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150725161632/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |archive-date=2015-07-25 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=EUR-Lex}}</ref><ref name=":7">{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=CNN}}</ref>.

@@ Line 31: / Line 31: @@
 In the case ''United States v.'' Microsoft Corp'''''.''','' 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000),<ref>[https://law.justia.com/cases/federal/district-courts/FSupp2/87/30/2307082/ "United States v. Microsoft Corp., 87 F. Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000)"] - law.justia.com - accessed 2025-01-29</ref> Microsoft's conduct taken as a whole was described as a "deliberate assault upon entrepreneurial efforts that, could well have enabled the introduction of competition into the market for [[Intel]]-compatible PC operating systems". Further, "Microsoft's anti-competitive actions trammeled the competitive process through which the computer software industry generally stimulates innovation and conduces to the optimum benefit of consumers."
-====Anticompetitive Practices revealed in this Lawsuit====
+====Summary of Anticompetitive Practices revealed in this Lawsuit====
-*'''Delaying competitors'''
+:* Intentionally slowing development of rival products like IBM and Apple through contractual or technical barriers.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2002-01-25 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171115104834/https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |archive-date=2017-11-15 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=justice.gov |publisher=U.S. Department Of Justice}}</ref>
-:Intentionally slowing development of rival products like IBM and Apple through contractual or technical barriers.<ref name=":0">{{Cite web |date=2002-01-25 |title=Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices And Consumer Harm In The Software Industry: An Analysis Of The Inadequacies Of The Microsoft-Department Of Justice Proposed Final Judgment |url=https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171115104834/https://www.justice.gov/atr/competitive-processes-anticompetitive-practices-and-consumer-harm-software-industry-analysis |archive-date=2017-11-15 |access-date=2025-08-23 |website=justice.gov |publisher=U.S. Department Of Justice}}</ref>
+:* Overcharging consumers by $20–30 billion for Windows licenses in the 1990s by hiding costs in PC bundles.<ref name=":0" />
+:* Deliberately degrading interoperability of competing software (e.g., Java, ''Netscape'') with Windows. <ref name=":0" />
-*'''Artificial price inflation'''
+:* Blocking rivals' distribution channels by signing exclusive deals with PC manufacturers and ISPs. <ref name=":0" />
-:Overcharging consumers by $20–30 billion for Windows licenses in the 1990s by hiding costs in PC bundles.<ref name=":0" />
-*'''Sabotaging competitors'''
-:Deliberately degrading interoperability of competing software (e.g., Java, ''Netscape'') with Windows. <ref name=":0" />
-*'''Exclusionary contracts'''
-:Blocking rivals' distribution channels by signing exclusive deals with PC manufacturers and ISPs. <ref name=":0" />
 ===Microsoft Corp. v Commission of the European Communities (2004-2007)===
 Faced EU penalties for bundling ''Media Player'' and ''IE''<ref>{{Cite web |date=2007-09-17 |title=EUR-Lex - 62004TJ0201 - Judgment of the Court of First Instance (Grand Chamber) of 17 September 2007. Microsoft Corp. v Commission of the European Communities. |url=https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |url-status=live |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150725161632/https://eur-lex.europa.eu/legal-content/EN/ALL/?uri=CELEX:62004TJ0201 |archive-date=2015-07-25 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=EUR-Lex}}</ref><ref name=":7">{{Cite web |date=2004-03-25 |title=Microsoft hit by record EU fine |url=http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060413082435/http://www.cnn.com/2004/BUSINESS/03/24/microsoft.eu/ |archive-date=2006-04-13 |access-date=2025-08-21 |website=CNN}}</ref>.