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: damniseedemons who wrote (20820)	9/3/1998 3:25:00 PM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Sal, I haven't noticed anyone around here who professes any legal expertise of late, Gerald Lampton hasn't been heard from in a while. He seemed to be getting sort of libertarian at the end, so he might agree. All I'd say is that the alleged Microsoft offer to Vobis of $9/cpu shipped with no DR-DOS, or $19/cpu shipped if DR-DOS was also included, sounds like postmodern economics to me. Doesn't make much sense in "free market" terms. On the business is war / objectivist moral imperative front, it's another story. Would the tactics used to do so be legal for a small company with no monopoly? Microsoft was a lot smaller, but IBM-compatible PC's were dominant enough on the business desktop, and they ran DOS. "No monopoly" is debatable. Remember, this is by and large a different suit from the DoJ Sherman action. Civil suit, Caldera (ghost of DR) vs. Microsoft, going to trial in Utah sometime this fall. It might feed into the DoJ action, which is broader in scope, but I don't recall it coming up. Cheers, Dan.

To: damniseedemons who wrote (20820)	9/3/1998 3:55:00 PM
From: Keith Hankin	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Would the tactics used to do so be legal for a small company with no monopoly? A small company with no monopoly would not be able to use such tactics, so the question is moot.

To: damniseedemons who wrote (20820)	9/3/1998 4:00:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Respond to of 24154

Hi Sal, Glad to see you back. Per the question, I think that some tactics are illegal monopoly or not - hiding evidence, conspiracy, restraint of trade, damaging the products of others, libel and slander, consumer fraud (vaporware?). How these might apply to the current situation I can't say. Until after the trial, anyway. Cheers, Chaz