Brinkley, J. Microsoft breakup is ordered for Antitrust Law violations. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com, June 8, 2000, 1-8.
Markoff, J. From the top, plans to march toward victory. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com, June 11, 2000, 1-6.
Stout, D. Judge explains rules of etiquette for the breakup. The New York Times. http://www.nytimes.com, June 8, 2000, 1-6.
Yet, more than anything to do with ethics, Microsoft’s past practices have evolved into dominant, successful ones as the company itself grew to dominate the technology industry. Many argue that the complaints of competitors are merely sour grapes and that Microsoft has done nothing unethical. For example, Microsoft lawyers insist that the company is not a monopoly because it competes against other operating systems from manufacturers like IBM and Apple. Further, they contend that the company’s contracts with Internet Service Providers (ISPs)are not exclusionary because they don’t block Netscape (Microsoft’s biggest competitor) browser from being available to the public. In addition, it argues that Windows is copyrighted and, as such, outweighs state antitrust laws.
ecruiting obstacles and the development of new businesses. However, Ballmer insists that while the government and competitors argue about Microsoft’s unfair tactics, consumers prefer things how they are and have come to trust Microsoft and its products. While in the U.K. during the DOJ ruling, Ballmer relates “I had a customer turn to me tonight and say: ‘Did you tell them there are a bunch of U.K. customers that would be very disappointed if it’s implemented? That there’s a bunch of us who really want your stuff to be integrated?’” (Markoff 2).
The ruling by the DOJ will break Microsoft into two competing companies. One will ma