Microsoft and U.S. Anti-Trust Policy

Paper Summary:

This paper briefly describes the U.S. government's case against the Microsoft company for its monopolistic business practices, the outcome of the case, and reasons why Microsoft should be considered a monopoly. The paper also touches upon the implications of the legal ruling in the Microsoft case for consumers and other large corporations.

From the Paper:

"The issue concerning the nature of Microsoft as a monopoly is a controversial one. Of course within the company, as well as among Microsoft shareholders, most assert that Microsoft's business practices are hardly monopolistic, and that it is simply "popular". However, many outside of the sphere of personal interest in the company are convinced that the term "monopoly" should have Microsoft in its dictionary definition. As Ralph Nader pointed out in a 1998 ComputerWorld interview, "Microsoft's claim that it is defending its right to innovate is a cruel joke in an industry that sees its best innovators attacked by the company's anticompetitive actions". Further, "Microsoft's agenda isn't innovation, its imitation, as well as the imposition of suffocating control over user choices and an ever-widening monopoly". "

More papers on Microsoft and U.S. Anti-Trust Policy:

• Essay # 65856 : "Monopolies and U.S. Anti-Trust Policy"
• Essay # 7804 : "Critical Issues in U.S. Latin American Policy"
• Term Paper # 68084 : "Microsoft's Anti-Trust Case"

APA Citation:

MLA Citation: