Full Article Attached Microsoft Violated Sherman Antitrust Act

Monday April 3rd, 2000

In his ruling today, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson found Microsoft in violation of the Sherman Antritrust Act, stating that "The Court concludes that Microsoft maintained its monopoly power by anticompetitive means and attempted to monopolize the Web browser market".

Microsoft's problem was that they had lost all credibility with the judge, and thus he had no option but to side with the facts presented by the government.

Click here to read an excerpt at

Here's a link to the ruling. Click "Full Article" below for some of our own excerpts. More to come, as we go over the ruling in more detail.

#12 Re: Re: NS got beat fairly?

by sleepy

Monday April 3rd, 2000 7:39 PM

You are replying to this message

"No one pays for using shared libraries, tpc/ip stacks, pull-down menus or filemanagers. All these things are universal, and part of any end-user operating system."

You pay for those when you buy a box of Windows. If you disagree, a car manufacturer could make a similar ridiculous claim, "yeah sure the car is $30000, but all the V6 engine, leather seats, and all that gimmicks are free!"

"If in 3 years XPCOM/XUL/etc makes TrollTech (software firm that *sells* a cross-platform GUI toolkit) go bankrupt, should they sue you?"

XPToolKit is never targeted to cut off competition. MS devoted millions of dollars in development and marketing of IE just to give it away for free, which doesn't make any business sense. Their strategy clearly is to cut off competition. Would you spent all your life-savings to develop a product and give it away?

"What would have happened if my car manufacturer wouldn't sell wheels with the car, but told me to go to a wheel manufacturer?"

Anyone would takes an OS class should know the difference between the kernel and user apps. Browser is clearly not a part of the OS, but wheels are integral part of a car. Your analogy is invalid.