Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 14th May 2012 15:20 UTC
Permalink for comment 518143
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Features
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/21/13 21:38 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/20/13 11:29 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/18/13 21:33 UTC
Linked by David Adams on 05/16/13 4:23 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/11/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/08/13 14:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/02/13 15:28 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/29/13 21:06 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/24/13 22:24 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 04/18/13 11:21 UTC
More Features »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2011-01-28
TechGeek,
I've mentioned this exact point a few times. Monopolies and antitrust seem to be surprisingly poorly understood here.
http://www.osnews.com/thread?517869
Even if microsoft were to open up a pogo stick factory and have very little market share, it might well get in trouble if it somehow used it's existing monopoly to harm competitors in the pogo stick market. It's a silly example but in order to move the discussion forward it's crucial to nail the point that microsoft's existing monopoly can violate antitrust regardless of it's share in the new market.
"Its not illegal to have a monopoly."
Yep, it doesn't matter that you have a monopoly, it just matters what you do with it.