United States Microsoft antitrust case

related topics
{law, state, case}
{company, market, business}
{system, computer, user}
{film, series, show}
{government, party, election}
{math, number, function}
{work, book, publish}
{game, team, player}
{land, century, early}

United States v. Microsoft was a set of consolidated civil actions filed against Microsoft Corporation pursuant to the Sherman Antitrust Act on May 18, 1998 by the United States Department of Justice (DOJ) and 20 U.S. states. Joel I. Klein was the lead prosecutor. The plaintiffs alleged that Microsoft abused monopoly power on Intel-based personal computers in its handling of operating system sales and web browser sales. The issue central to the case was whether Microsoft was allowed to bundle its flagship Internet Explorer (IE) web browser software with its Microsoft Windows operating system. Bundling them together is alleged to have been responsible for Microsoft's victory in the browser wars as every Windows user had a copy of Internet Explorer. It was further alleged that this unfairly[citation needed] restricted the market for competing web browsers (such as Netscape Navigator or Opera) that were slow to download over a modem or had to be purchased at a store. Underlying these disputes were questions over whether Microsoft altered or manipulated its application programming interfaces (APIs) to favor Internet Explorer over third party web browsers, Microsoft's conduct in forming restrictive licensing agreements with original equipment manufacturer (OEMs), and Microsoft's intent in its course of conduct.

Microsoft stated that the merging of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer was the result of innovation and competition, that the two were now the same product and were inextricably linked together and that consumers were now getting all the benefits of IE for free. Those who opposed Microsoft's position countered that the browser was still a distinct and separate product which did not need to be tied to the operating system, since a separate version of Internet Explorer was available for Mac OS. They also asserted that IE was not really free because its development and marketing costs may have kept the price of Windows higher than it might otherwise have been. The case was tried before Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. The DOJ was initially represented by David Boies.

Contents

Full article ▸

related documents
Trade secret
Statute of limitations
Grand jury
Plea bargain
International Criminal Court
Pleading
American Civil Liberties Union
Personal jurisdiction (United States)
Administrative law
Fatwā
Will (law)
Bhopal disaster
Kenneth Starr
Victimless crime
Romer v. Evans
Deposition (law)
Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act
Precedent
Property law
James Randi Educational Foundation
Product liability
Mens rea
Australian Secret Intelligence Service
Res ipsa loquitur
Right of self-defense
Tom Denning, Baron Denning
Vexatious litigation
Defense of Marriage Act
Expert witness
Mutiny