Antitrust_Claims

Antitrust Claims Antitrust laws formed in the 19th century to fight the accelerating domination of large monopolizing industries that drove small companies out of business and the demands of the public for the government to protect them. The Sherman Act was the response of congress in 1890, in addition to the Clayton Action in 1914 and the Robinson-Patman Act in 1936, which were all developed to enforce unfair business practices. Although these acts have been put in place, suits are still filed such as the antitrust case against Microsoft filed on behalf of Netscape regarding anticompetitive practices that violated federal antitrust law. The suit was settled and developed an agreement to join forces to develop a digital media environment free from piracy, open to a variety of industries and consumer access. This paper will review the main facts of antitrust laws and analyze the alleged charges against Microsoft with regards to anticompetitive practices. Traditionally, antitrust policies adapt both political and economic values and have applied considerably to international activities that affect US industries. The www.definitions.uslegal.com website describes the Sherman Antitrust Act as a law that forbids: conspiracy of two or more to restrain trades, attempts to unlawfully monopolize an industry and price fixing. However, the act does not have limitations on how large a company can get, unless it creates a monopoly or greatly lessen the competition. Violations of the laws can lead to a fine or conviction. The textbook describes violations of the Sherman Act may receive a fine of up to $1 million per violation and/or up to 10 years in jail for individuals; $100 million in fines per incident for corporations (Mallor, Barnes and Thomas, 2010). Anticompetitive practices occur when one or more firms increase their profits without lowering the price of their products or services. Microsoft is a corporation that settled to pay millions AOL Time Warner on behalf of Netscape Communications for a suit of allegedly committing anticompetitive practices. The suit claimed Microsoft harmed Netscape’s browser business with the Windows operating system; however, it was not filed until the US District Court ruled that the company was involved in anticompetitive practices and violated federal antitrust laws. Again, Microsoft finds itself in another antitrust suit with Wisconsin residents who claimed the company broke the unfair competition law by charging them more for the software products during 1993 to 2003 and again they settled for millions of dollars. The Milwaukee Journal Sentinel, states Microsoft denies any wrong doing and there were no rulings of merit from the state court (Hajewski, 2006). Over one hundred suits were filed and they settled in many states. The settlements could lead to the belief that Microsoft is guilty of the charges and are valid. The US District Court started a chain reaction of the suits when the violation of antitrust ruling was made. After the ruling individuals and competitors filed suit against the software mogul and a lot them were settled totaling several millions of dollars, including California’s settlement of $1.1 billion in 2003 (Hajewski, 2006). The fact that Microsoft is the prominent software used world-wide, shows that they are meeting the needs of people and businesses. Therefore, the company was not intentionally monopolizing the software market; they just had a commodity that is beneficial to personal lives and businesses all over.   References Mallor, J.P., Barnes, A.J., Thomas, B., & Langvart, A.W., (2010). Business Law: The Ethical, Global, and E-Commerce Environment. McGraw-Hill Primis Custom Publishing, (14th edition) DORIS HAJEWSKI. (2006, October 21). Microsoft to pay up to $224 million in state; Vouchers to software buyers will settle antitrust lawsuit :[Final Edition]. Milwaukee Journal Sentinel,p. D1. Retrieved May 14, 2012, from ProQuest Newsstand. (Document ID: 1149173981).