Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


United States v. Microsoft

The case between Microsoft and the United States Department of Justice and 20 U.S. states is the benchmark case regarding Anti-trust in cyberspace and gained a lot of attention similar to the Hollywood Anti-trust Case of 1948. In this case, civil actions were filed against Microsoft for allegedly monopolizing Intel-based PC’s and the sales of operating systems and the bundled web browsers. It was argued that Microsoft hurt other internet browsers by unfairly bundling Internet Explorer. Whereas, Microsoft’s argument was that merging with Internet Explorer was not necessarily monopolizing but an act of fair competition and advancement. Microsoft continued to stress their stance that in their attempts to innovate, rival companies have been persistent in damaging their image. Microsoft feels that they should not be penalized for being, what they claim to be, innovative.

USA v. Microsoft Corp.

U.S. v. Paramount Pictures

As touched on earlier, the United States v. Paramount Pictures case nicknamed, the “Hollywood Anti-trust Case of 1948” was the one of the most important Anti-trust cases in the United States and the film industry in general. The issue in this case was whether the movie studios have the right to own their own studios and to choose which venues to show their films. It was found that the defendant, Paramount, had been involved in unfair practice of ownership of theater chains and booking.

UNITED STATES V. PARAMOUNT PICTURES, INC.

CNN Reaction to Bill Gates

Highly criticized for his evasive answers during a taped deposition, Bill Gates produced inconsistent and vague answers that caused the judge to chuckle during the anti-trust trial. Mr. Gates seemed to be elusive when wording his answers by questioning the definitions of certain words. The war of words during this deposition did not effectively help Microsoft’s side of the case when presented in the trial.

Gates deposition makes judge laugh in court

Final Judgment

After the United States Department of Justice stated that they would no longer seek a break-up of Microsoft, on November 2, 2001 they came to an agreement on a settlement. In the settlement, the Department of Justice did not require any change in Microsoft’s code or partnerships, however, it did require them to share its application programming interfaces with other third-party companies. In addition, a panel will be formed to monitor Microsoft’s systems for five years.

Final Judgement

  • No labels