Microsoft: An Examination of Monopolies

A monopoly is advantageous to the society and is encourages by the government if there are high fixed costs and very strong economies of scale. At the same time, it could also lead to unequal distribution of wealth; containment of consumer choice; lobbying and unethical spending.

Finally is the allowance of these monopolies to rise in the first place. Since there were no regulatory agencies back in the second industrial revolution, big businessmen with the idea of trimming fat in their companies could conquer any competitor by using hardball tactics of purposely

According to the Department of Justice, Microsoft used its resources and technology to drive other companies out of business, thereby eliminating the competition and creating a monopoly. Without competition, Microsoft was able to set prices and consumer conditions in a way that exceedingly benefited the company while ensuring a decreased amount of new competition because of the proprietary software installed in most PCs. (Competitive Processes, Anticompetitive Practices and Consumer Harm in the Software

In Document 4 “A Call to Action,” by James B. Weaver, it explained to the public through the author's thoughts of that monopolies had too much power and that the monopolies destroy competition and trade. This book was written at the time of when big corporations were taking over and destroying competition. Also, the author goes into detail that they control the price of the raw material, so they can produce their products at a low price and sell it at a low price. By selling that the lowest price, the competitors can not compete are driven out of business or reduce the wages of the workers. This idea can be related to current times were big corporations, such as Walmart, are destroying competition because they lower their prices that the competitors cannot compete with.

Monopolies are quite dangerous economically, and are usually broken up by the federal government, with only two exceptions- electricity, and gas. These are modern examples. A monopoly is the economic term for when a company that makes a product has no competition, and can raise the prices as high as they want. For example, the most obvious and powerful monopoly of the industrial revolution was the railroad monopoly. They made money quite quickly as a shipping company, and destroyed any and all competition as the only transcontinental railroad at the time. It’s leader, Cornelius Vanderbilt came to be considered one of the most powerful people of all time, due to his control over who he shipped for.

United States vs. Microsoft is one the largest, most controversial antitrust lawsuits in American history. Many claim the government is wrongly punishing Microsoft for being innovative and successful, arguing that Windows dominates the market because of the product’s popularity, not because of malpractice by the parent company. Others argue in favor of the government, claiming that Microsoft’s practices conflict with the free market ideal. There are many arguments for both sides of the lawsuit, but what the case really comes down to is this: does the government have the right to interfere in today’s marketplace? Or is Microsoft violating laws that are rightfully imposed by the government?

In economics, a monopoly is a single seller. In law, a monopoly is a business entity that has significant market power, that is, the power to charge high prices.[4] Although monopolies may be big businesses, size is not a characteristic of a monopoly. A small business may still have the power to raise prices in a small industry (or market).[5]

On July 15, 1994, the United States sued Microsoft for unlawfully maintaining its monopoly in the market for PC operating system software. The lawsuit alleged that Microsoft engaged in anti-competitive marketing practices directed at PC manufacturers that distributed Microsoft operating system software preinstalled on its PCs. Microsoft began to levy fines against original equipment manufacturing (OEM) companies who distributed or promoted operating systems other than Microsoft. On August 21, 1995, Microsoft "consented" to a "Final Judgement" against them.

The Justice Department and the states contend that Microsoft is violating the Sherman Antitrust Act, which was passed by Congress in 1890. The act has two sections. Section I prohibits certain types of agreements that restrict the flow of trade. Section II prohibits the misuse of monopoly power, namely anti-competitive actions that seek to maintain that monopoly power and actions that attempt to use that monopoly power to dominate another market (2).

to compete, so it opted to try to form a monopolistic trust in order to eliminate the competition. But to determine if Microsoft was attempting to violate the Sherman Anti-Trust Act, a trust must be defined. By definition, a trust is a combination of firms formed by legal agreement. While it may not be obvious to the average consumer, Microsoft, by trying to negotiate an agreement between the two businesses so it could have a better grip on web browsing, hints at wanting to form a trust between the two. Not many people had non-Windows systems so Microsoft would have the Netscape browser be offered to the minority of customers while making itself available to the masses. Microsoft would not directly gain money from Netscape, but its losing potential customers meant that Microsoft would gain more money indirectly.

“The Sherman Act imposes criminal penalties of up to $100 million for a corporation and $1 million for an individual, along with up to 10 years in prison”(Federal Trade Commission, n.d, para.4). My own parents were Microsoft users and they started telling me that Microsoft was down in the dumps, no longer satisfying their customers. Microsoft has harmed a handful of their customers by the actions they have taken when presenting their updated software and abusing their power to push away their competitors in a not so nice way. Based on my research and findings, I wouldn’t necessarily always say that monopolies and oligopolies are bad. I can vouch for Microsoft and say that they have became really successful in the software industry and it is amazing to see how far they have come.

The case against Microsoft was brought buy the U.S. Department of Justice, as well as several state Attorneys General. Microsoft is accused of using and maintaining monopoly power to gain an unfair advantage in the market. The case has been under observation for a long time, but the Justice department is having trouble coming up with substantial evidence against Microsoft. Specifically, the Department must prove:That Microsoft has monopoly power and is using it to gain unfair leverage in the market.And that Microsoft has maintained this monopoly power through "exclusionary" or "predatory" acts(Rule).Some say that Microsoft is only taking advantage of its position in the market and using innovative marketing strategies

In May 1998, the United States Department of Justice and a group of nineteen state plaintiffs filed for four type of antitrust violation against Microsoft Corporation as they believe that Microsoft has used its monopoly in operating system software to protect its dominance and to eliminate competitors. Microsoft engaged in abusive practices to the 1890 Sherman Antitrust Act sections 1 and 2 (Scholarship). Microsoft preinstalled Internet Explorer on personal computers and raise the price of the Window’s software. Microsoft force users to use Internet Explorer as a default browser which prevented other browsers that were in competition being downloaded which put an inconvenience to their consumers. Microsoft attempted to dissuade Netscape from

Does the government have the right to regulate large corporations, namely the Microsoft Corporation? If so, then to what extent can the government do so? Based on our research, it is the government’s responsibility to remedy Microsoft’s noncompetitive behavior in order to increase fair competition.

What is a monopoly? According to Webster's dictionary, a monopoly is "the exclusive control of a commodity or service in a given market.” Such power in the hands of a few is harmful to the public and individuals because it minimizes, if not eliminates normal competition in a given market and creates undesirable price controls. This, in turn, undermines individual enterprise and causes markets to crumble. In this paper, we will present several aspects of monopolies, including unfair competition, price control, and horizontal, vertical, and conglomerate mergers.