Underlying these disputes were questions over whether Microsoft altered or manipulated its application programming interfaces (APIs) to favor Internet Explorer over third party web browsers, Microsoft's conduct in forming restrictive licensing agreements with original equipment manufacturers (OEMs), and Microsoft's intent in its course of conduct. Microsoft stated that the merging of Microsoft Windows and Internet Explorer was the result of innovation and competition, that the two were now the same product and were inextricably linked together and that consumers were now getting all the benefits of IE for free. Those who opposed Microsoft's position countered that the browser was still a distinct and separate product which did not need to be tied to the
Abstract Microsoft has been investigated several times for antitrust violations. While most of those cases led nowhere, there was one suit brought forth that “the US articulated a compelling story of anticompetitive activity…” (Lopatka, 2008, para 1). Microsoft’s questionable practices were brought into light and determined to be in violation of the Sherman Act. This paper discusses what antitrust claims were made and whether those claims were valid. Microsoft and Antitrust Violations The purpose of antitrust statues is to preserve and promote free market competition in the United States (Mallor, Barnes, Bowers, & Langvardt, 2010).
Bundling, or product bundling, is where several products are combined for sale as one package. In 1995, Microsoft signed a consent agreement decreed by the Department of Justice due to antitrust allegations and investigations. Antitrust is a law that promotes market competition by regulating anti-competitive conduct by companies. In 1998, Microsoft was brought up on charges again because of their antitrust behavior and violating the signed consent agreement made in 1995. A judged found, "Microsoft has demonstrated that it will use its prodigious market power and immense profits to harm any firm that insists on pursuing initiatives that could intensify
Since RIM’s CEO, Mike Lazaridis did not respond, NTP filed a lawsuit. RIM believed their actions were a nuisance and represented patent trolling. The company considered NTP’s lawsuit a counter-action from lawsuit they filed for patents for integrated electronic mailboxes against Glenayre Electronics. In a press release RIM deemed NTP’s filing as unsubstantiated and assured everyone information they had was retrieved from their website. During litigation, RIM attorneys showed proof of wireless email dated back to 1988.
Beyond the exterior characteristics of a mac verses a PC, Macs are better computers because they have a well established operating system as well as reliable software. A website, with non-biased opinions and facts, claims that “Microsoft’s inconsistent behavior and an interface that changes radically with every version are the main reasons people find computers difficult to use. Microsoft adds new bells and whistles in each release, and claims that this time they've solved the countless problems in the previous versions... but the hype is never really fulfilled.” This same website states that ‘the Mac OS user interface inspired the creation of Windows, and is still the target Microsoft is trying to equal. As a popular consumer product, there's plenty of
Meanwhile, the case study of Kodak will supplement to each aspect. The term of ‘disruptive technology’ was first coined by Harvard Business School professor Clayton M. Christensen and he suggested that it is a new technology that unexpectedly replaces the existed technology (Techtarget.com 2006). Carefully speaking, this kind of innovation means another different value network to the existed one and generates a niche market, which will eventually disrupt the existing value network and market (Wikipedia.org 2011). The explanation suggests that the disruptive technology is obviously a threat to the incumbent successful firms. It is undoubted that most successful firms have failed to compete with the entrant firms because of the disruptive technology.
Last week, we learned that the NSA's strategy to enhance its surveillance capabilities was to weaken internet security in general. The NSA infiltrated the social-professional standard-setting organizations on which the whole internet relies, from National Institute of Standards and Technology to the Internet Engineering Task Force itself, the very institutional foundation of the internet, to weaken the security standards. Moreover, the NSA combined persuasion and legal coercion to compromise the commercial systems and standards that offer the most basic security systems on which the entire internet runs. The NSA undermined the security of the SSL standard critical to online banking and shopping, VPN products central to secure corporate, research, and healthcare provider networks, and basic email
Financial Reporting Project Part III Apple Inc. and Microsoft Corp. are two very interesting companies to compare when taking into account all the publicity they receive and the public perception of the two. A very shocking find was the large difference in acid-test ratios. The current assets to current liabilities ratio for Microsoft was more than double that of Apple. This gives the users of the financial statements a good bit of extra security when looking at the ability of the company to pay their short term debt. In a time when Apple is pounding the market with time tested software and product name, Microsoft, a company that is looking to find a new niche in a world of rapidly increasing technology, is looking to assure investors that while times are a bit uncertain for them in terms of product, managers have a firm grasp on fiscal responsibility and will never throw caution to the wind.
It seems to be a legal blunder that is very straight forward, but becomes a heated debate. It begins with the argument should we prosecute a gamer for stealing via the virtual world? Alex Weiss is correct in saying that prosecution for virtual theft is wrong in the scheme of things, because each player reacts differently to behaviors. Even though a person is a “raider” in a game, it doesn’t make them a criminal in the real world. Weiss opens up his article with, “As a reformed online gaming thief, this ruling makes no sense to me.
In the end, I had an employee who had violated the NDA, Aaron Web, and another employee who had broken the law for tdhe company, Jamal Moore. * The first step taken in the case was to figure out what the problem really was and what issue applied to the problem. My decision on this was, “Whether you should use the information obtained by Jamal Moore to discipline Aaron Webb for violating the NDA.” Personally, I was worried that if I knowingly used the illegally-gathered information from Jamal against Aaron, would be unethical and pose a possible legitimate for Aaron against the company. * The second step was to identify the stakeholders. It