[Am-info] US warns EU against Microsoft anti-trust moves

[Hans Reiser]

Roy Bixler wrote:

>On Wed, May 15, 2002 at 03:08:58PM -0400, Erick Andrews wrote:
>  
>
>>"Mr James said US courts had established that monopoly leveraging 
>>actually benefits consumers, who can enjoy better service and consistent
>>quality."
>>
>>Well excuse me.  I must have missed those decisions by US Courts.
>>Anyone know which ones and their relevance to this MS case?
>>    
>>
>
>Even if you could find such US court decisions, since when does their
>jurisdiction extend to Europe?  With bombastic rhetoric like
>"monopolies are good for consumers" (maybe, but what about
>entrepreneurs and the economy in general?) and "companies that
>dominate one market are allowed to use that dominance to give them an
>advantage in adjacent markets" (which, by the way, seems to directly
>contradict the Sherman Antitrust Act), he expects to find common
>ground?  It seems they have a different view of antitrust in Europe
>and I think he will find another of those "cultural differences"
>waiting for him.  He probably will have a chilly reception to his
>quaint notion that Europe should be bound by US court decisions too.
>
>  
>
>>It would appear Mr James would do away with the DOJ's Antitrust
>>division.
>>    
>>
>
>He is definitely trying to dispose of the Microsoft antitrust case as
>if it had never been filed.
>
>  
>
During the last 20-30 years, some of the pro-monopoly interests have 
been lobbying the judiciary, and systematically undermining the 
anti-trust laws.  Edwin Meese started packing the courts with pro-trust 
judges, and when Bush picked Charles James, he picked a man known to 
oppose laws against tying.

Monopoly leveraging is clearly illegal, but the current generation of 
judges is eager to serve the powerful, and the anti-trust laws are not 
enforced.  

Historically, enforcement of antitrust in Europe has been weak, but this 
is the historical lowpoint of anti-trust enforcement in the US, and so 
now even the Europeans seem to be tougher enforcers.  I don't really 
expect the Europeans to do much, but it would be nice to be wrong.

With regards to Charles James's logic, just ask him sometime if the 
profit to the monopolist from engaging in tying is the difference 
between the market price and the marginal cost.

Or, ask him how wonderful it is to eat overpriced and badly made popcorn 
and hotdogs during a movie instead of sushi from the corner sushi-to-go 
stand.

Charles James is paid to be dumb.

Hans