med to be "integrated." To what extent does Internet Explorer rely on the code built into Windows, and visa versa? Also, can Internet Explorer be "uninstalled" without compromising the operation of Windows? The DOJ claims that tying Internet Explorer and Windows is a misuse of Microsoft's operating system monopoly to artificially exclude browser competition and deprive customers of a free choice between browsers. Customers still have a choice. With a few clicks of the mouse, anyone can download Netscape is they should choose to do so. Does Microsoft have a unique advantage by being able to package its browser with Windows? Of course. It has earned that advantage, because it, and no one else, developed Windows into a leading product. Yes, it is true that because end users want a large number of applications available and most applications today are written to run on Windows, there are some barriers to entry in the market for PC operating systems. It seems unfair to penalize Microsoft for being too successful but if in the long-haul their success results in harm to consumers, then preventative action should be taken now. Provisions of the Clayton Act make it illegal "where the effectmay be to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly, " for a firm to "tie" the sale of one separate product (which Internet Explorer might be legally judged to be) to the sale of another (Windows). The most important doctrine in prosecuting Microsoft was set forth in United States v. Griffith, which states that a monopolist may not use a monopoly in one field as a leverage to gain a monopoly in another. It is using its OS monopoly power to gain a monopoly in the browser field. If it is determined that Windows and Internet Explorer are two separate and distinct fields then they are breaking the law if however as Microsoft claims they are not then what they with respect to the tying charge have is simply a competitive advantage. Another ...
