Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: John F. Dowd who wrote (34720)	11/23/1999 8:40:00 PM
From: John F. Dowd	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74651

To All: Here is another flavor although it all looks the same: Ohio suit alleges Microsoft overcharged consumers (Recasts, updates with state suit filed) CINCINNATI, Nov 23 (Reuters) - A pair of lawsuits filed in Ohio on Tuesday charged Microsoft Corp. with overcharging customers, the latest in a flurry of suits filed on the heels of a judge's ruling that the software giant abuses its monopoly power. Stanley Chesley, a prominent attorney who has previously led legal battles against cigarette makers, breast implant manufacturers and other large industries, filed the class-action suits in U.S. District Court in Columbus and in state court in Cincinnati. He said the federal court case may be consolidated with similar federal suits filed against Microsoft recently in Alabama and Louisiana on behalf of computer consumers. Another class-action suit filed in San Francisco Superior Court on Monday against the world's leading software maker sought to recover damages on behalf of private clients. Those suits and others filed in state courts have emerged since the landmark Nov. 5 finding of fact by a Washington federal court judge that Microsoft abused its monopoly position, hurting consumers, competitors and other companies. "We have estimates that consumers have been collectively overcharged $10 billion" by Microsoft, Chesley said in a telephone interview. A victory in the federal court suit filed in Columbus, Ohio, could result in an award that is triple the $10 billion cost figure, Chesley said. The suit filed in state court could result in a damage award double the alleged overcharged amount. The suits may also tack on additional defendants such as computer makers because their licensing agreements with Microsoft might have led to customers being overcharged or forced them to use Microsoft's Internet browser, Chesley said. Additional plaintiffs could be added to the state suit, including "indirect purchasers" of Microsoft products such as personal computer buyers. Microsoft has admitted no wrongdoing in the U.S. District Court case in Washington brought by the Justice Department and several states. Presiding Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson last week offered the parties a mediation led by Judge Richard Posner, who heads the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit in Chicago.

To: John F. Dowd who wrote (34720)	11/24/1999 3:28:00 PM
From: nommedeguerre	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

John, "The point that is being made is that IBM, a then much larger company, was a direct software competitor of MSFT and certainly had their own built in alternative and was a direct competitor of MSFT in the O/S software market. " This still does not explain how selling licenses of Windows will hurt MSFT. It would boost IBM's HARDWARE sales, an area in which Microsoft definitely does not compete directly; how does shipping a PC with Windows boost the sale of any other OS? That is Microsoft's whole strategy: lock the end-user into Windows regardless of platform. This is why they are paying people to put WinCE on everything. IBM is hardly a bad credit risk. What did they owe 10's of millions for? I don't remember. Businesses this large usually fail to pay for contractual reasons (i.e. Microsoft failed to live up to a contractual agreement hence the contractual payment was not made. This is the way corporations operate, has nothing to do with the inability to pay.). The processors in the IBM PC's are Intel or Intel-licensed compatibles yet IBM makes the PowerPC and other processors. Does IBM pay more per processor to AMD or whomever simply because they are a competitor in the processor market? Would Firestone refuse to sell Ford tires simply because Ford owned Pirelli? Cheers, Norm