Abstracts - faqs.org

Abstracts

Business, general

Search abstracts:
Abstracts » Business, general

Verdict in a Connecticut suit lifts Microsoft defense team

Article Abstract:

A jury in Federal district Court in Bridgeport, Connecticut ruled that no antitrust laws were violated by Microsoft Corp. in its dealings with Bristol Technology Inc. Experts feel that the verdict may help Microsoft keep from being sued by other private firms for antitrust violations. However, the jury did find that Microsoft had violated a Connecticut law that prohibits 'deceptive practices,' such as making statements that are misleading to a business partner. But Bristol was awarded damages of only $1 by the jury. Bristol's suit stemmed from its contention that Microsoft new license terms constituted a 'bait-and-switch' tactic and were harmful to Bristol. Microsoft acknowledged that its license terms changed, but claimed that it was due to changes in business conditions.

Publisher: The New York Times Company
Publication Name: The New York Times
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0362-4331
Year: 1999
Bristol Technology Inc.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA


Microsoft's final antitrust case witness stumbles a bit

Article Abstract:

Richard L. Schmalensee appeared on Microsoft's behalf to offer a final refutation of the government's antitrust case against the software maker. One important issue in the case is whether Microsoft engaged in predatory pricing practices by including it's Internet Explorer browser for "free" with Windows 98. Mr. Schmalensee tried to make the case, by an analogy, that this was not an egregious instance of underselling a competitor to drive them out of business. Jundge Thomas P. Jackson questioned this conclusion. A Microsoft attorney, Michael Lacovar, made the point that since AOL has acquired Netscape, and plans to market it as part of their service, that Microsoft again faces competition for computer users' dollars from an equal adversary.

Author: Brinkley, Joel
Publisher: The New York Times Company
Publication Name: The New York Times
Subject: Business, general
ISSN: 0362-4331
Year: 1999
Testimony, Schmalensee, Richard L.

User Contributions:

Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:

CAPTCHA



Subjects list: United States, Computer software industry, Software industry, Software, Cases, Microsoft Corp., Antitrust law
Similar abstracts:
  • Abstracts: Its trial on hold, Microsoft maps out its options. Microsoft official concedes company sought to restrict web-browser choices
  • Abstracts: Microsoft fires first salvo in antitrust fight with U.S.; software maker seeks 7 months to prepare. Testimony on Microsoft's league of its own; alterations to Java provide a new form of attack in the U.S. case
  • Abstracts: An HMO chief makes a bet on being big. United HealthCare takes a big charge. United HealthCare to acquire Humana: plan to form U.S.'s biggest managed-care concern is valued at $5.38 billion
  • Abstracts: Applied Materials to cut staff 15%, salaries. Microsoft's goals include making software accessible
  • Abstracts: Philip Morris increases price of cigarettes. RJR unit's suit claims store promotion by Philip Morris is unfair competition
This website is not affiliated with document authors or copyright owners. This page is provided for informational purposes only. Unintentional errors are possible.
Some parts © 2025 Advameg, Inc.