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 (19850)	6/1/1998 10:06:00 PM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 24154

I was reading through all the pro-microsoft dreck in the article below, when I came across the following tidbit: But Bill Gates and Microsoft still have a major choice that -can- be made: Move the company headquarters from Redmond, Washington up north about 115 miles to Vancouver, British Columbia and operate as a Canadian- company. ... . . . at which point, I nearly fell off my chair laughing. While Canada is a great country, I can't imagine that Microsoft would view moving there as a solution to its antitrust problems. Although Online Newsletter obviously has never heard of the extraterritorial application of antitrust laws, I am sure Bill Neukom has, and I'm sure both he and the DOJ have thoroughly researched the subject, in the case of Neukom, before, for example, advising his client to negotiate with the European competition authorities. Plus, although I've read that their antitrust laws are weaker than ours, Canada is not lacking in its own populist tradition; nor is it berift of "dern Eastern" liberal politicians who would love nothing more than another big corporate boogey-man to beat up on. Under the NAFTA rules the U.S. couldn't restrict its U.S. sales and couldn't undermine the company's operations either. Maybe not, but I know of at least one post-Nafta case where a U.S. court applied U.S. antitrust law to the Canadian subsidiary of a U.S. corporation that was exporting back into the U.S. Call off the dogs (contact your elected officials to do so) - we're about to lose a major company and its technology to another country. Maybe so, but not because of the DOJ's antitrust case. If Microsoft does this, it will be strictly for symbolic reasons -- to send a message. Then look for there to be a big debate: the folks on the right saying we just lost the crown jewel of capitalism, and the folks on the left saying this is just a case of a bunch of fugitives running from the law. All I can say is: If Microsoft is going to bluff, it needs to come up with something more credible than this. Otherwise, it won't have any credibility at all. ===================================================================== Online Newsletter Copyright 1998 Information Access Company. All rights eserved. Monday, June 1, 1998 Vol. 19, No. 6-7 ISSN: 1040-6646 GOVERNMENT DOESN'T "GET" IT: MICROSOFT FIGHTS BACK Neither the U.S. government nor 20 states "get" it: -- What they don't "get" is that you don't kill the Goose that laid the Golden Egg and expect it to still produce. On Monday, May 18, the U.S. federal government and 20 states filed a major anti-trust case against Microsoft claiming that the company had a "choke hold" on competitors which is denying consumers important choices about how they buy and use computers. ... Sure. It's not just the Justice Department (and President Clinton and vice president Gore should know better too - after all it was Gore that helped coin the term "information superhighway" - plus the fact that Janet Reno works for the President) - the Congress is just as much in the dark too, with countless numbers of bills poised to limit the flow of information over the Internet (see our continuing "Meddling with the Internet" series -ed.). Are these issues related? ... You bet they are! -- It means that government is too big and out of control with reality. Only the Supreme Court seems to be the more knowledgeable hero in this scenario thus far (one out of three branches of government), and needless to say, if the Legislative (Congress) and Executive branches of U.S. government (i.e. Justice Department) can't get their act together, then the Judicial branch of government (i.e. Supreme Court) is going to shoot them down all over again on Constitutional grounds... At least we hope so. The demands of the government lawyers have been absolutely incredulous, even though Microsoft offered some serious concessions to avoid a long and costly litigation process. -- To wit, the demand of government lawyers to require that Windows 98 include the Netscape and one other browser, and change its opening proprietary screen which identifies Microsoft as the author of the operating system -- are totally unreasonable and ludicrous. (Microsoft thinks so too - terming the government's position as "unreasonable demands".) As a result, Microsoft withdrew any concessions it might have offered and pressed on with the anti-trust lawsuit which is coming. ... And well it should. Microsoft will deliver its Windows 98 operating system - integrated Internet Explorer and all - despite government warnings. But Bill Gates and Microsoft still have a major choice that -can- be made: Move the company headquarters from Redmond, Washington up north about 115 miles to Vancouver, British Columbia and operate as a Canadian- company. ... Under the NAFTA rules the U.S. couldn't restrict its U.S. sales and couldn't undermine the company's operations either. -- Canada (and almost any other country in the world would welcome Microsoft with open arms - not to mention a lot of tax breaks to go with its relocation as well - and Microsoft can well afford the move). Who is the loser going to be? ... You and me and just about every business in the U.S. While the U.S. government has yet to fix its "Y2K" problems, air traffic control, weather forecasting and warning systems, and a host of nearly all other government entities that rely on government written or contracted software, it has shown that it is totally embarrassed that a private for- profit software company knows how to do the job better that -it- does. One only has to note that in spite of all the technological and telecommunications gadgetry, the U.S. was "surprised" by India's testing of nuclear weapons - any more than its gadgetry can't stop the flow of drug trafficking across U.S. borders. Furthermore, the Congress would like to restrict information on the Internet that would prevent U.S. citizens (albeit indirectly) from finding out what's really happening in Washington, DC. [Now in late-breaking developments, the government is considering anti-trust action against Intel. ... What goes on here??] Microsoft is not like AT&T (a regulated monopoly), nor IBM (which relied heavily on government contracts to survive) - nor is it in any way similar to Rockefeller's oil empire. As one newspaper recently put it: "Gates' sin is success". Microsoft can well afford to abandon its Redmond, Washington location - and should do so -- quickly. Many other U.S. companies have already done so long ago for similar and economic reasons: it's too expensive and the U.S. government meddles too much with the way companies operate. ... It's a global economy, stupid. In a global economy (and software can be sold and downloaded over the Internet easily today) - we've got to get elected officials and bureaucrats to give up trying to do things the way they've done for the past century. It should also be noted that no political party in the U.S. seems to get the message either. ... That -should- mean votes - if the public really understands it too - and an election year is coming up soon. Gates understands well that technology changes rapidly - enough that Microsoft is always at risk from new developments that could alter the company's future drastically. ... The government does not. Call off the dogs (contact your elected officials to do so) - we're about to lose a major company and its technology to another country. [RSH]