To: asformeandformyhouse
Actually the notion is not that simply including a browser is a violation of law, but rather the collusion to exclude any others browsers being included by the OEMs.
Which is not what Opera alleged in its complaint. Opera alleged that the inclusion of IE with Windows itself was a violation of the law. Opera did not allege that Microsoft was using its OS market share to exclude competitors in the web browser market. It simply said that the fact that there is an Internet Explorer shortcut on your desktop by default when you install Windows is a violation of law. What Opera wanted was unreasonable access to the Windows installation and setup process, sort of like Honda attempting to use litigation to get their cars sold on Toyota lots next to Toyota's own cars.
I'm 99% sure you're confusing what Opera complained about with the popular misconception of what the Clinton DoJ went after Microsoft for.
54 posted on
07/29/2009 3:09:05 PM PDT by
Terpfen
(FR is being Alinskied. Remember, you only take flak when you're over the target.)
To: Terpfen
“I’m 99% sure you’re confusing what Opera complained about with the popular misconception of what the Clinton DoJ went after Microsoft for.”
That’s not how I remember it, but I will check on that.
55 posted on
07/29/2009 3:25:56 PM PDT by
asformeandformyhouse
(I've been listening to a lot of rap music lately. Mostly at red lights and stop signs.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson