Re: Copyright upholds Monopoly,was: Microsoft's OS competitors

Mario Heilmann <a3[_at_]a3.com> wrote:
>
> How come the anti trust probe went nowhere? Why don't they create
> exemptions to copyright protection to break up this monopoly? Why do
> they not force Microsoft to publish, COMPLETELY, and in advance, all
> operating system specifications, and to prohibit the use of undocumented
> system calls by any application software. If the specifications were
> complete and exhaustive, reverse engineering is unnecessary. And, the
> way the monopoly hides itself behind a shroud of secrecy, reverse
> engineering is actually the only possible self defense.
>
> Why do anti trust authorities not require good programming techniqes:
> modularity and clearly defined interfaces between parts of the operating
> system? Thus, other companies could, more easily produce parts of the
> operating system, the same way as car parts can be made by many different
> companies?
>
> Why does no other country take similar anti trust measures? After all,
> Microsoft is a monopolist in almost all countries.

Why should Microsoft bother with the extensive development necessary to create a Windows95, only to give it away for free? Unfortunately, software developers need to be paid.

Additionally, we need one system to run computers because we enjoy the access it gives us to a great variety of programs and to each other's computers.

Kill that, and the prices for software and hardware will increase tremendously. In other words, I believe with your idea, you'd be cutting off your nose to spite your face.

Rebecca Winters
<winbec[_at_]ezlink.com> Received on Tue Apr 29 1997 - 01:51:21 GMT