Microsoft

Microsoft

There have been many arguments and issues that have been raised with the controversy over Microsoft and the U.S. Department of Justice’s claim against Microsoft and its founder Bill Gates of monopolistic practices in bundling its internet browser “Internet Explorer” into its popular Windows computer operating system. By doing this, Microsoft would effectively crush its competitors (it’s main rival being Netscape Navigator), and acquire a monopoly over the software that people use to access the Internet.

I recently heard a listener on NPR (National Public Radio) comment about the monopoly issue between Microsoft and the U.S. D.O.J. that “Intellectual endeavors are vastly infinite and thus cannot be monopolized.” I wonder if the person who said this has ever tried telling that to Bill Gates. More importantly, is such a statement true? Does computer software constitute an intellectual endeavor that cannot be monopolized? To answer this issue, an inductive argument can be applied to determine if Microsoft truly has a monopoly over the computer industry. To say that something is infinite implies that there is an endless supply of it. Is this the case in terms of the Internet and the software that is used to “navigate” or “explore” the Internet as the two leading Internet Browsers have been dubbed by their makers? The resources of the Internet may seem infinitely vast, but it is wholly finite. There is an abundance of information out there on the Internet that it seems unlikely that any one company or even a country like the U.S. could ever monopolize this vast data network. By the nature of how the Internet works and how information is stored and shared on the network, it is true that a monopoly cannot be held over the intellectual information stored within the Internet. On this point I will accede to the original author’s claim that intellectual endeavors cannot be monopolized, but this is vastly different from the issue that stands before Microsoft and the U.S. Department of Justice. The question that must be distinguished is not if Microsoft will gain a monopoly over the Internet, but if it will acquire a monopoly on how people access the Internet. These two are wholly separate issues. This is not a question of control of intellectual information, but the means by which people gain *access* to that information. Even if the inform...

... middle of paper ...

...l by bundling its browser into its operating system which already controls 90% of the worlds’ market.

The ubiquitous nature of Microsoft in our everyday computing lives is seemingly subconscious, yet when we realize the broad influence of this computer giant upon our life it becomes a frightening possibility. Thoughts of Orwellian “Big Brother” comes to mind at times. The question of whether Microsoft has a monopoly over the computer industry is a resounding yes. It is a near virtual monopoly in the computer industry. The question thus becomes not whether Microsoft is a monopoly, but why it has taken so long for the government to intercede into the affairs that would regulate this ever growing computer giant. It would be wise to follow the lesson of Jack who cut down the beanstalk in a fable that has all too real applications in our modern-day computerized world.

Bibliography

Gleick, James. “MAKING MICROSOFT SAFE FOR CAPITALISM” The New York Times Magazine. William Morris Agency, May 18, 1995.

Nader, Ralph and Love, James. “What to Do About Microsoft?” LE MONDE DIPLOMATIQUE, November 1997

NPR News. May 5 1998 (Station KBRW 89.9 FM) 8:00 AM “Morning Edition”