Microsoft's hired economist, Richard Schmalensee of MIT, declared in court
that Microsoft does not have a monopoly because it could be threatened by
future (though currently non-existent) rivals. And I suppose some murderer
will now claim his act was "self defense" because it was possible someone could
threaten him with a baseball bat some time in the future. Reported in LA Times,
15 JAN 1999.
In other action Schmalensee claimed that Intel based PC's did not constitute "a market", so there could be no monopoly since there was no market to monopolize. Government lawyers reminded him that in other cases he had claimed that Intel PC's did constitute a market.
Geez, Bill. Can't you afford better than this - or is there still some academic integrity out there?
©:Andrew Grygus - Automation Access
All linked pages are copyright © the original creator.
Velocity Networks: Network Consulting Service - Internet Service Provider - Web Page Design and Hosting
All trademarks and trade names are recognized as property of their owners