Microsoft antitrust case


Published on

Published in: Business
  • Be the first to comment

Microsoft antitrust case

  1. 1. Antitrust Case
  2. 2. OUTLINEMicrosoft a monopoly?Microsoft Antitrust Case TrialMicrosoft Antitrust Case VerdictMicrosoft Antitrust Case AppealSWOT AnalysisConclusion
  3. 3. Microsoft a monopoly? In late 1990, Microsoft’s MS Office applications had 90% of market share Market share in Internet browser market of 44%, server operating system 36% Microsoft adopted pricing policy that prevents entry of new players and bundle policy Distributing Internet browser software, IE, free of cost along with its windows operating system
  4. 4. Microsoft Antitrust Case: Trial US Government claimed, Microsoft broken Antitrust policy October 1997, DOJ began Antitrust investigation May 1998, gave both parties 5months to fight suitAllegations Justification by MicrosoftViolating 1994 Consent Ruled out any kind ofdecree ViolationAbuse of monopoly power Not a illegal monopolyMade misleading statements Not possibly mean doom forand claims competitorsUnfair market strategy No one has guaranteed position
  5. 5. In June 2008, the US District court gave its ruling that Microsoft has violated the antitrust laws by abusing its power in operating system Jackson ruled that Microsoft was a monopoly; basing on 3 factors Microsoft’s share of the market for operating system was extremely large & stable A high entry barrier protected Microsoft’s dominant market share High entry barrier Verdict Company should split into 2 smaller companies Windows operating system Internet & other Business Further Microsoft should auction off the windows source code
  6. 6. Microsoft Antitrust Case: Appeal September 2000, Supreme court declined government’s bid Break up Microsoft not remedy: Supreme court Court upheld conclusion of Microsoft having monopoly & violated US antitrust laws In 2001, court ordered Microsoft and US government resolve remaining issues
  7. 7. SWOT Analysis STRENGTH WEAKNESSHuge Brand name and Customers lacked areputation in the market commercially viable alternativeHave a monopoly in the to windowsmarket Contradiction among own products OPPOTUNITIES THREATHave potential to attract Threat from competitorsmore customers companies like from Linux andShould establish a clean Appleimage May face strong illegal obligation
  8. 8. Conclusion Microsoft dominance because of Antitrust case, affected only for short run Microsoft’s OS monopoly continues today Microsoft has so many actions against it, can only cover the most important Law should not eradicate competition rather it should ensure proper competition