My two cents' worth to the Department of Justice.
---------- Forwarded Message ----------
Subject: Microsoft Judgement
Date: Sun, 9 Dec 2001 12:49:13 -0500
From: Tim Wright <t.wright1@mindspring.com>
To: microsoft.atr@usdoj.gov
Any settlement with Microsoft must include remedies to correct Microsoft's
abuse of its monopoly position as well as sanctions to prevent future
violations of antitrust law.
End users suffer injury from the existing monopoly because of Microsoft's
effort to exclude competition of any kind in the software business.
Competition is essential in any non-regulated business to provide the best
quality products at the lowest prices to the end user. Microsoft's current
position in software is not that much different than the position Standard
Oil Company held at the turn of the 20th century.
Any settlement with Microsoft must include measures to allow competition in
the software business. These measures should include allowing computer
manufacturers and distributors to load other operating systems alongside
MS-Windows to provide the end user with a choice. Current licensing
restrictions from Microsoft prohibit this, and for anticompetitive reasons,
these and similar restrictions must be struck down as unlawful.
Microsoft's offer to give away their software products to schools will
actually spread the same monopoly that brought about legal action in the
first case. A more appropriate action would be Microsoft providing the
funding for schools to buy software of their choice. Microsoft already has a
monopoly position in business application software, and allowing it to build
a monopoly in the educational market will do great harm in a sector already
strapped for funding.
If the Court does not break up Microsoft in the same fashion that Standard
Oil and AT&T-Bell System were broken up, then other measures must be taken to
allow competition back into this marketplace. The end user has been robbed of
his freedom of choice, and the Court must restore freedom of choice to the
software market, especially in light of the fact that the Court has
established that Microsoft operates as a monopoly, and it has operated
unlawfully to maintain its monopoly position.
This monopoly must either be broken up like the Standard Oil and Bell System
monopolies, or regulated in the same fashion as a public utility. History has
shown that the public benefited highly from breaking up monopolistic firms.
The telecommunications boom would not have occurred under the old Bell
System, and the energy market would be very different had Standard Oil been
left intact.
Evidence exists to show that significant innovation in software products has
been stifled and suppressed by Microsoft. There is currently no indication
that this will stop, and for that reason, Microsoft should be split into two
or three companies: an operating system company, an applications software
company, and an Internet software company. Collecting fines and compulsory
donations to schools and charities has no deterrent effect against Microsoft
continuing to violate the law and abuse its monopoly position.
Regards,
William T. Wright
-------------------------------------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 20:08:24 EDT