Microsoft Hatred FAQ

Paul Rubin http
Thu Oct 27 22:57:29 CEST 2005


"David Schwartz" <davids at webmaster.com> writes:
>     Sorry to be pedantic, but I think it's an important point that no court 
> ever found that Microsoft illegally acquired a monopoly. So to characterize 
> the monopoly itself as "illegal" is simply erroneous.

Who is paying you to tell these ridiculous crap?  The monopoly is illegal
if maintained by anticompetitive means regardless of how it was acquired.
>From http://cyber.law.harvard.edu/msdoj/conclusions-l.html:

   Section 2 of the Sherman Act declares that it is unlawful for a person
   or  firm  to "monopolize . . . any part of the trade or commerce among
   the  several  States,  or with foreign nations . . . ." 15 U.S.C. § 2.
   This language operates to limit the means by which a firm may lawfully
   either  acquire  or  perpetuate  monopoly  power. Specifically, a firm
   violates  sec.  2  if  it  attains  or  preserves  monopoly power through
   anticompetitive acts.

   The threshold element of a  sec 2 monopolization offense being "the
   possession of monopoly power in the relevant market...

David Schwartz, I have a direct question for you: are you on
Microsoft's payroll?



More information about the Python-list mailing list