[Am-info] Legal monopoly?

[John J. Urbaniak]

John Poltorak wrote:

> On Tue, Apr 30, 2002 at 02:25:48PM -0500, Eric Bennett wrote:
> > John Poltorak wrote:
> >
> > > What spin would you put on this section of the Sherman Act?
> >
> > Legally, there is a distinction between a business which bases its
> > activities on the premise of responding to market forces and creating
> > better products or more efficient business practices, and a business which
> > bases its activities on the primary goal of destroying competition.  The
> > latter is the "monopolization" that is prohibited by the Sherman Act;
>
> Destruction of competing products my Microsoft is well documented.
>
> They stole STACs code and incorporated it in DOS 6.
>
> They sabotaged DR DOS by putting spurious code into Windows 3.11.
>
> They 'fined' IBM for daring to offer a rival OS on some of its computers.
>
> They 'stole the air' which Netscape breathed.
>
> There are probably many other examples as well...
>

Well, it goes way back to the legendary "DOS isn't done until Lotus won't run."
Wasn't that DOS 2?

John