I have been following the case, and more particularly, Microsoft, since I began using their products in 1987. I developed software in Vancouver, Canada and now in Mexico and the US solely for the Windows operating systems and the applications that Microsoft sells (Office and BackOffice applications).
You have managed [in "Don't Punish Success"] to encapsulate the irrationality of the Microsoft antitrust case in a few paragraphs. You have provided a transparent legal insight into the results of any potential resolution under publicly-known remedies. You only missed one motive behind the Clinton Administration’s antitrust campaign: Force the Golden Goose to buy government support (AKA Increase the party coffers, for Election 2000). And you provided no second-guessing about what Microsoft might do to “shelter” itself. That’s good. I like that. There’s enough theories around by the many “yellow-journalists” seeking to grab the next top job at Microsoft’s expense, that it’s refreshing to read an expert’s focussed succinct and replete article.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law are third party online distributors of the broad collection of current and archived versions of ALM's legal news publications. LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law customers are able to access and use ALM's content, including content from the National Law Journal, The American Lawyer, Legaltech News, The New York Law Journal, and Corporate Counsel, as well as other sources of legal information.
For questions call 1-877-256-2472 or contact us at [email protected]
