Thursday, January 28, 1999
Government agents should open windows for Microsoft
FREEDOM: Anti-trust laws give Uncle Sam too much control over
smart business practices
There is at present a travesty of justice occurring within our
government. A man is being prosecuted, although he has committed no
crime. I am speaking of the government’s case against Microsoft and
Bill Gates. This case illustrates yet again that when our
government takes action, it oversteps its bounds, makes things
worse, and all the while claims to be acting in our best
interests.
The Department of Justice’s case revolves around the fact that
Microsoft wanted to include its Internet Explorer as part of its
Windows operating system.
The government’s claim is that Microsoft has an unfair advantage
over its competitors. According to these charges, Microsoft has a
dominant share of the market and is using this position to unfairly
block competition.
But take a closer look at what the government is saying:
Microsoft should not have the ability to set the conditions of sale
for its own product. Even though Microsoft created its product, the
government gets to make sales decisions about it.
The government actually wants Microsoft to promote the products
of its competitors. How is that fair? Will Coke now have to include
a can of Pepsi in every six-pack?
Over time, products change and additions are made. Refrigerators
have had ice makers and water dispensers added. Cars have improved
with the addition of air conditioners and safety features.
Telephone service has gained call waiting,voice mail and caller
identification. This is the beauty of capitalism. Products need to
continually improve if they are to remain desirable to
consumers.
That is what Microsoft is attempting to do with the integration
of Internet Explorer with Windows. The Internet is rapidly growing
and becoming an integral part of our routines. Thus, integrating
the browser and operating system makes it easier to transfer data
from the Web to one’s desktop. In addition, this addition was free.
The cost of Windows is still the same with the addition of
Explorer.
Is that an unfair practice, giving something away for free? In
addition, Microsoft never disallowed the use of other Web browsers
on its operating system. Netscape can still freely be used on
Windows. That sounds pretty fair to me.
And Windows itself is relatively inexpensive. In the 1970s,
operating systems cost upwards of $600. Windows 98 can be purchased
for $80. Here we have a product that is continually improving while
the price is dropping.
And there is nothing inherently wrong with a monopoly. It is
perfectly just when a firm attains a paramount market position
through creativity and accomplishment.
The reason Microsoft has such a dominant share of the
marketplace is because it has made a quality product that people
use. At the same time, monopolies would cease to exist if they no
longer serve the interests of the public.
The charges brought against Microsoft were done so by its
competitors, who were too inept to make a quality product of their
own. Competitors are trying to get the government to weaken
Microsoft so they can then compete.
And look at who is doing the prosecuting – the government. The
government actually has the nerve to say something else has too
much power.
This government spends more money in one day than Microsoft
earns in one year. And this money comes from shoving a gun in our
faces and taking the money from our hands.
Government agents do not have to earn the money they spend. They
do not have to produce anything nor do they have to engage in legal
business practices. All they have to do is pass another law.
And then what happens if you do not choose to pay your taxes or
allow the government to extort your property? Can you live your
life in peace? No. Armed guards burst through your door, throw you
in jail and seize your property.
So, this same government is charging unfair practices against
Microsoft. When has Bill Gates ever shoved a gun in your face and
said you have to buy Windows 98?
If you do not buy Microsoft products, your freedom is not taken
away. You are free to go on living. Gates’ power comes from the
fact that people voluntarily engaged in trade with him and his
company. A useful product was offered and consumers purchased
it.
On the other hand, the power of the government comes from the
barrel of a gun. Everything Bill Gates owns has been earned.
Everything the government owns has been gained through extortion.
Gates does not have the luxury of shoving a gun in your face, so he
actually has to earn his money.
In addition, anti-trust laws have no actual concrete basis.
Anti-trust laws are purposefully ambiguous which then gives the
government virtually unlimited powers. There is no precise legal
definition of unlawful business practices, so now any successful
business can be prosecuted. Alan Greenspan spoke of "anti-trust" as
"a word in which the law is so vague that businessmen have no way
of knowing whether specific actions will be declared illegal until
after they hear the judge’s verdict – after the fact (Robert S.
Getman, ‘The Brain Thieves’)."
What this case boils down to most of all is that the government
just wants a whipping boy. If government officials are so concerned
with unfair business practices, then why do they not go after
telephone companies who try to block the release of the cable
modem? The cable modem already exists, so why is it not on the
market? Phone companies will lose service fees if it is released,
so they have an interest in blocking it. Why is the government not
investigating this, if they are so concerned with the good of the
consumer?
Government interference causes more harm than good. Take for
example the breakup of AT&T. This was supposed to create
competition and lower rates. While rates are lower today, service
fees have gone up leaving no benefits for consumers. And then we
have the added annoyance of different phone companies bothering us,
wanting us to switch plans.
The government action against Microsoft is immoral. It goes
against everything this country stands for. If you wish to protest
this injustice, you can visit http://www.capitalism.org/ microsoft
and sign the "Petition to Stop the Persecution of Microsoft." This
is a way to let politicians know that they are not acting in your
name, and that Bill Gates should be applauded for all that he has
accomplished, rather than persecuted for the ineptitude of
others.
Comments, feedback, problems?
© 1998 ASUCLA Communications Board[Home]