[Am-info] Legal monopoly?

[John J. Urbaniak]

to "...combine and conspire with any other person or persons,
to monopolize any part of the trade..."

Hmmm.  I remember Lou Gerstner announcing that "OS/2 was only for IBM's 'top 2000'
customers."  That was right around the time they were wheeling and dealing the Win
95 license for IBM.  And at that time, OS/2 was the nearest thing to a
"competitor" Windows had.

That sounds a whole lot like agreeing to "split the market" to me.  In truth, IBM
killed OS/2 entirely, not just for the "top 2000."  That announcement effectively
removed OS/2 from the market.  I know I was devasted and have yet to recover.

I bet dollars to donuts that Gerstner *conspired* with Microsoft to give Gates his
monopoly.  What Sir Lou got in return remains unknown for now.

But I really, really wish some respectable journalist would do some serious
investigating into this IBM angle of the sordid Microsoft story.  Is there any
thing nowadays as a "respectable journalist?"

John


John Poltorak wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 01:16:12PM -0400, Sujal Shah wrote:
> > On Tue, 2002-04-30 at 06:10, John Poltorak wrote:
> > [SNIP]
> > > This is truly scary, as it gives Microsoft the right to leverage all their
> > > existing monopolies to establish themselves in new markets and
> > > systematically take them over as well.
> > >
> >
> > Repeat after me: Monopolies are not illegal.
>
> Repeat after me: I will read Section 2 of the Sherman Act before putting
> foot in mouth.
>
> Just for your benefit, I will quote it:-
>
> http://www.antitrustupdate.com/Statutes/ShermanAct/ST-Sherman1-4.html#2
>
> 15 U.S.C. 2: Monopolizing trade a felony; penalty
>
> Every person who shall monopolize, or attempt to monopolize,
> or combine or conspire with any other person or persons,
> to monopolize any part of the trade or commerce among the
> several States, or with foreign nations, shall be deemed guilty
> of a felony, and, on conviction thereof, shall be punished by
> fine not exceeding $10,000,000 if a corporation, or, if any other
> person, $350,000, or by imprisonment not exceeding three years,
> or by both said punishments, in the discretion of the court.
>
> > It is, however, illegal to leverage a monopoly "to establish themselves
> > in new markets" as you put it.  Just because the monopoly exists doesn't
> > make it illegal or legal.
>
> What spin would you put on this section of the Sherman Act?
>
> > In fact, I'm not even sure you can call a
> > monopoly illegal or legal... I mean, it is or it isn't.
> >
> > The legality is in how you got it and how you use it.
> >
> > Sujal
>
> --
> John
>
> _______________________________________________
> Am-info mailing list
> Am-info@lists.essential.org
> http://lists.essential.org/mailman/listinfo/am-info