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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (17725)	3/3/1998 1:06:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Respond to of 24154

Gates blasts investigators news.com Microsoft chairman Bill Gates has harsh words for the U.S. Justice Department and the Senate committee investigating his company's business practices. In an interview in today's Washington Post, Gates warned that Justice's efforts to block the software giant from adding new features to its Windows software could topple the company if those efforts succeed. We should be so lucky. Good warmup for going before those Senators, let'em know they're all a bunch of jerks in the morning paper. Gates also suggested that the department brought the consent-decree lawsuit to justify its long-running investigation of Microsoft. "If a policeman follows you for a thousand miles...you might decide he needs to write you a ticket at some point," Gates told reporters and editors at the paper. "In other words, he kind of looks a little stupid." So, you flip him the bird to make sure he knows what you think of him. OK, Microphiles, leave aside the argument that antitrust shouldn't exist for the moment. Given that it does, and that there's a bunch of people whose job it is to enforse the law, who should they be investigating instead of Microsoft? What part of the economy is in more danger of monopolistic control than the computer and internet sectors? Cato Institute fellow Robert Levy, a longtime critic of antitrust laws, said Microsoft is disingenuous when it claims it alone has caused two products suddenly to be one. "I'm much more comfortable arguing we shouldn't have antitrust laws at all," he said. Given current law, he said he believes the DOJ will almost certainly win a tying case brought over Microsoft's integration of OS and browser. Courts have long ruled it is illegal for dominant companies to run smaller companies out of business through predatory pricing. (from www5.zdnet.com; The Cato Institute is not exactly noted for employing leftists. Cheers, Dan.

To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (17725)	3/3/1998 1:08:00 PM
From: damniseedemons	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 24154

Not a trick question, Dan, nor the same question that we've been through "a million times before." Please try to better understand my posts before attacking/dismissing them. I am not speaking of the contractual dispute with Sun/Microsoft's Java license. I'm talking about the DOJ "investigating Microsoft's attempt to 'balkanize' Java." Which I infer means that they think there's something illegal about Microsoft's strategy on this front. That's my question: is it illegal for a company try to fight a competitive threat?