And now we move on to Netscape, the full text located here:
http://www.tbtf.com/resource/netscape-letter.html
The text is of a letter sent to Joel Klein of the Justice Department
Microsoft Illegal Conduct and Ramifications for Consent Decree
This letter is intended to supplement and clarify our earlier
communications with the Department concerning conduct by Microsoft that
violates both the existing Consent Decree as well as the substantive
antitrust laws.
The Internet software industry currently exhibits great innovation,
with the development of an astonishing number of new products and
technologies that promise to transform the way that computers are used.
These new products and technologies are being developed by a wide array of
companies, from new start-ups to more established software firms. Many of
the smaller Internet software vendors (including companies that make
Internet software tools and servers), however, now face the threat of
elimination from the market by reason of Microsoft's illegal conduct. While
Netscape has greater resources to fight back against Microsoft's predation,
both in the marketplace and through means such as this letter, many of these
smaller Internet software vendors have made it clear that they have
insufficient resources to fight back against Microsoft's illegal conduct in
the market.
Netscape was better able to fight predation by Microsoft, but still they
were unfairly destroyed by Microsoft's anti-free market tactics
nevertheless. Netscape did us all a huge favor in making Mozilla open
source though. We users should be grateful for that long-sighted action.
The letter goes on to note:
Much of Microsoft's conduct appears to violate both the letter and
spirit of the existing Consent Decree entered in United States v. Microsoft.
Indeed, Microsoft's behavior is, if anything, more anticompetitive and
pernicious than the conduct addressed specifically in the Decree. In
engaging in this far-reaching anticompetitive behavior, Microsoft hurts
consumers and restricts consumer choice.
I am one of those hurt consumers - from all the hassles of having to deal
with defective Microsoft products to being overcharged by them for Internet
service. Back when Bill Gates was in court and saying "Well, yes, our
competitors complain, but our customers are happy!", I wanted to jump into
the courtroom and give testimony from at least one very dissatisfied user!
- Anyone interested in how Microsoft destroyed Netscape (the AOL-owned
version today is basically the name only), would do themselves a favor to go
to the link above and read the entire letter, but here are a couple more
examples of foul Microsoft deeds:
The net effect is this. Every OEM automatically gets the Microsoft
browser on the Windows desktop provided by Microsoft, whether desired by the
OEM or not. If the OEM wants to give the consumer a fair and even choice of
browsers by placing competitors' browser icons in a comparable place on the
desktop, Netscape has been informed that the OEM must pay $3 more for
Windows 95 than an OEM that takes the Windows bundle as is and agrees to
make the competitors' browsers far less accessible and useful to customers.
Some OEMs have gone so far as to indicate that the Microsoft Windows
discount really buys exclusivity. For example, Hitachi has refused to bundle
Netscape Navigator with its laptop computer because it says that it is
prohibited from carrying the product under its license with Microsoft.
Indeed, Hitachi now has gone even further, and informed another company that
it cannot carry its software because that product includes Netscape
Navigator and therefore is prohibited by the Microsoft license.
The potential magnitude of Microsoft's secret tax on the OEM channel
-- all for the purpose of restricting consumer choice -- is truly
breathtaking. If estimates are correct that Windows 95 is selling at a rate
of 40 million copies or more a year. it will cost OEMs more than $10 million
to offer their customers non-Microsoft Internet software on an equal footing
with that of Microsoft. And Microsoft has made sure that customers will
never learn about these under-the-table deals. Microsoft muzzles all of the
OEMs with "non-disclosure" terms that place them in an entirely untenable
position: they have been induced with secret payments, and ostensibly cannot
tell anyone, including their customers, about them.
[snip, snip, snip] The reason for Microsoft's conduct - Obviously,
Microsoft has so little confidence in the success of its products in a fair
comparison with those of other software vendors that it has resorted to
undisclosed, under-the-table payments and other forms of coercion to impose
its products on consumers.
When this form of organized crime is pointed out to some people, they
sometimes say "Organized crime? Where is the blood and where are the dead
bodies?" Most organized crime does not involve blood - it involves ruined
lives, ruined companies, ruined dreams, and - in fact - we are all victims
in the long run, so Microsoft supporters shouldn't feel warm and fuzzy
because they profess allegiance to a "strong" company. The truth of
everything will come into play at some point. In any case, read the whole
letter, it shows the stuff that Microsoft is made of.
RM
