IP: More on : split MS into 3 identical companies

[Dave Farber <farber () cis upenn edu>]

From: "John Lyon" <jelyon () jelyon com>
To: <farber () cis upenn edu>


Some of our fellow IPers may be interested in John Dvorak's column in
the latest PC Magazine, Feb 09, 1999, "Nationalize Microsoft."

I hesitate to quote from the article, lest the quotes propigate,
contextless; and yet, I will not be dissuaded from doing so.

He's not pro-government, nor anti-competitive, and he writes (in
part):

          The typical outcome of an antitrust case is usually
     some sort of consent decree with continued oversight by
     a court. This will not work with Microsot, which will
     forever be dragged into court saying it's complying while
     it continues  anticompetitive practices. Regulating the
     software industry as a whole or Microsoft specifically
     would be impractical. Simply using eminent domain laws
     to nationalize the company is the only solution and the
     only way to reinvigorate innovation and competition. It
     will level the playing field and stabilize Windows, which
     has yet to be debugged.

Snide swipe at Windows aside, his concept raises issues not addressed
in his article, for example, if MS were to be "nationalized", what
implications would that have for Windows users in other countries?
What kind of pricing structure would the Government use? Free? Monthly
Fees? Taxes? To whom would go the profits? Would it be better to
"Internationalize" Microsoft?
____________________________________
John Lyon, Proprietor and Impresario
      http:// jelyon dot com
The hurrier I go, the behinder I get