Did Microsoft Violate Antitrust Policy?

The US complaint has been commitd by a topaz, a sensitive Burlingame, California-based hardware vendor that says it is a Microsoft dependent phonationner, but has still been caused world-shattering harm by Microsofts exclusionary and restrictive practices1The Northern California Company Tangent, who is also a Microsoft Certified Partner, has claimed that Microsoft has caused them significant harm through exclusionary and restrictive practices.2In its complaint, Tangent describes patterns of anti rivalrous practices by Microsoft. The activities listed by Tangent incorporate the procedure of no-option bundling of sentinel (electronic mail software) with Office (a suite of word processing, financial, media and various business software) and active agent Directory (Lightweight Directory Access Protocol which provide central authentication and authorization run for Windows based computers) with Windows Server (host integration).The forced process under the bundling formation al so includes the Windows Media Player (a software application player and library for digital media) and Windows Media Server (advanced live video and audio streaming functionality) along with the screen background personal computer and the server operating system, e.g. XP, Vista, etc.Tangent attorneys stated in the virtue suit, Microsofts exclusionary and restrictive practiceshave caused significant harm to (Tangent) by increasing, maintaining or stabilize the price it salaried for Microsofts operating system software above competitive levels, 3In a filing with the US territory Court for the Northern District of California, Tangents resident territory and the right of the plaintiff to file locally, is in the clear supportive position to show cause of how Microsoft has historically continued to engage in anticompetitive conduct and practices. Thereby cavictimization irreparable financial and market damages by directly manipulating by opposite means in a anatomy of forms the pr ice Tangent has paid for Microsofts operating system software. Clearly upon comparison and review the prices are openly above competitive degrees.Tangent has been able to list in the detail the historical relation of the personal computer and the Microsoft factor. They contend that Microsoft, in the letter of the rightfulness as well as the spirit, has still failed to operate at heart number of instruction guidelines and continues to violate Section 2 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C., 2.Tangent has taken on the interesting position of requesting a jury to hear the case sort of of a judge. Clearly, the intent is to bring up to peers or citizens who will hear tribute as to the unfair practices of Microsoft. There is the grave risk on the part of the Tangent argument that the youngs are very complicated and so technically that only engineers or legally trained experts can decided on the case. It can be equally promised that Microsoft lawyers will attempt to convolute the issue to a level of complicate techno speak in order to project the jury and possible deadlock or mistrial. Either way, the path for appeal is being paved.Without the normal constraint of frank competition in the marketplace and also because of exclusionary practices invoked by Microsoft as a standard practice, Microsoft has been able to fare in a way that the increases the playing field edge in its favor. Additionally, this method active by Microsoft works to preserve or artificially maintain prices at anti-competitive conditions that cause harm to vendors and business partners. 4In essence, Tangent has supercharged that Microsoft has artificially inflated prices for the cost of the operating system software for certified partners who have no other choice in the matter thusly injuring Tangent.One of the strongest positions taken by Tangent against Microsoft is that the Microsoft server OS (operation system) includes specific, unique, undocumented programs and screens (interfaces) acce ssed and employed by its servers to communicate seamlessly and tacitly with one another. Primarily, the use of several servers (server farm) is wi sharp a multiple network server community.Tangent alleged elevate that Microsoft entered into restrictive agreements with OEMs (Original Equipment Manufacturer) and system builders, limiting or eliminating their ability to feature non-Microsoft products. 5Cleary, the or so important aspect of the Tangents argument, which in this case can be take a firm stand by any plaintiff, is for Microsoft to cease marketing products under the guise that the uniformity of its software is standardize and practical. This is not the case nor has it been in kind of a while. The position by Microsoft does not give rise to a supportive community of certified partners. Candidly, it causes a minor panic.Microsofts secretive and clandestine modus operand lends it self to a sense of obvious guilt. The resistance to the drop out of the source code for any of its of its operating systems underlies its non-competitive practices.Demonstrating no miss of indignation, Microsoft has chosen not to respond to any comments on this complaint or that fact any other. Their practice has been to only to acknowledge that the case is being reviewed.Tangent is based in the San Francisco Bay Area city of Burlingame and builds custom configured-to-order desktops, notebooks, thin clients and servers primarily for educational institutions, government agencies, business markets and proprietary enterprises. The company is using the Microsoft Operating Systems. 1 -Microsoft faces fresh US and EU antitrust complaints 23rd February 2006 2 http//wowtechminute.com/93/antitrust-lawsuit-antithesis/ Antitrust Lawsuit Antithesis Posted by Brent Norris Technology tidings March 2006 3 http//news.com.com/Computer+maker+files+antitrust+suit+against+Microsoft/2100-1014_3-6041788.html By Ina fry Staff Writer, CNET News.com Published February 21, 2006, 4 http//www.thei nquirer.net/default.aspx? term=29797 Off at a topaz By INQUIRER staff Monday 20 February 2006, 1010 5 http//www.channelinsider.com/article/Tangent+Suit+Claims+Microsoft+Soaked+Partners/171923_1.aspx Tangent Suit Claims Microsoft Soaked Partners encounter 21-FEB-2006 By John Hazard