Microsoft's Violation of Anti-Trust Laws
No. 94-1546
United States of America
Plaintiff and Appellant,
v.
Microsoft Corporation,
Defendant and Respondent
TABLE OF CONTENTS
STATEMENT OF ISSUES ..........1
STATEMENT OF FACTS............1
ARGUMENT.......................4
CONCLUSION....................7
STATEMENT OF ISSUES
1. Did Microsoft Corporation violate the Sherman Antitrust Act Sections 1 and/or 2?
2. Did Microsoft have societal economic impact in the browser market?
3. What was the Microsoft's Internet Explorer's demand and supply during this period?
STATEMENT OF FACTS
1. Microsoft violated both Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act over a time period stretching from 1994 to 1998. It tried to violate Section 1 by trying to force Netscape to enter into a horizontal agreement that would have limited Netscape's market and the public's choice amongst Internet browsers. Netscape refused the deal. Microsoft then used vertical restraints in order to hinder Netscape from being loaded on to computers that came from Original Equipment Manufacturers (OEM), also a violation under Section 1 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.
Apple Sticker
Netscape Navigator 9.0
Netscape 4.08In addition to the Section 1 violations Microsoft also engaged in violations of Section 2. Microsoft thought its monopoly in the Operating Systems (OS) market were threatened by Netscape's browser and that it could lose some of it's 80+% market share it enjoyed in the United States of America. It therefore went out to use the monopoly power it had in the OS market to start a "Browser War" against Netscape at all cost. Microsoft bundled the OS and the browser Internet Explorer together and forced OEMs to sell all of their Personal Computers (PC) with this new configuration, or they would be supplied with an outdated non-functioning OS from Microsoft for which there was no fix. The OEMs were also forced to agree not to pre-install Netscape Navigator or face additional penalties from the...