

Apple's anti-Amazon moves may cost it some big fines




In March, it was reported in 








Comments     Threshold


RE: wow
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/26/2010 10:29:12 AM , Rating: 5
Just like Microsoft did a decade ago. Oh wait...that's right they never did crumble.

Ok how about this: Looks like people are finally *saying* Apple will crumble (just like Microsoft).

That's better.

Jokes aside, I'm not sure either of you really understand the government's actions here.

The goal with Microsoft, Intel, and now Apple was never to kill them or "make them crumble". Rather it's to prevent them from abusing their position. Most industrialized nations have no laws preventing a monopoly. Rather they have laws preventing a company from abusing its monopolistic position.

While fines levied against Intel and Microsoft by the U.S. DOJ and EU's EC seem massive, they're just a drop in the bucket compared to these companies quarterly revenue (maybe something like 1/30 of the year's revenue). However, they're large enough to make the companies think twice about trying to kill the competition.

The merits of such laws are certainly open to debate, but they seem to have been at least mildly successful with regards to Intel and Microsoft in the U.S. and EU. Microsoft now is much more open in letting software competitors design products that can FULLY exploit its systems' capabilities (e.g. Open Office 3, Google Docs, Firefox, etc.). And Intel has reportedly stopped trying to pressure retailers to ban AMD products in return for discounts. In both cases the companies maintained their dominant position, for the most part, but consumers gained access to new products, should they want them.

Hopefully the same kinds of benefits will result from the Apple antitrust inquiries.

I know anti-Apple fervor is high right now and many would love to see Apple "crumble" but that is absolutely NOT the government's role. That should be up to the free market to decide. Fortunately, the government has no intentions to take on such a role.

RE: wow
By Reclaimer77 on 5/26/10, Rating: -1
RE: wow
By JasonMick (blog) on 5/26/2010 1:30:22 PM , Rating: 5
We've already seen the outright government takeover of GM. So how you can sit there and say they have no intentions of getting involved in businesses and deciding their fate is foolishness.

The takeover of GM has very little to do with government antitrust regulation (other than perhaps some vast liberal conspiracy in your mind). Besides if your point was that the government was destroying companies, you accidentally provided evidence to the contrary -- the government artificially SAVED GM from complete liquidation of all assets due to lack of a bank that could underwrite the bankruptcy process.

Well actually they are probably going to pass sweeping "financial reform" which, with ZERO oversight, the government can take over any business it sees fit for any reason.

I meant the government as a whole. Sure there are radical left voices (Patty Murray, Jack Reed) that might advocate mild socialism. However, there's equally radical right voices (the soon to be elected Rand Paul, for example) to balance that out by advocating ZERO regulation and letting abusive monopolies do whatever they want.

The radicals on both ends make a lot of noise, but thus far the result has generally been yes, there is government regulation of monopolies to prevent abuse, but no the government isn't destroying companies.

RE: wow
By Reclaimer77 on 5/26/2010 2:09:48 PM , Rating: 2
My mistake. I was making a broader point than JUST anti-trust. I see how off key my post must have looked now.

RE: wow

The Monopolies And Restrictive Trade Practices Act.

Further reading:

