[vox] OS/2 and Linux, why has IBM changed?

[Eric D. Pierce]

On 8 May 2003 at 13:52, Don Werve wrote:

From:           	Don Werve <donw@yosemite.examen.com>
To:             	vox@lists.lugod.org
Subject:        	Re: [vox] OS/2 and Linux, why has IBM changed?
Send reply to:  	vox@lists.lugod.org
	<mailto:vox-request@lists.lugod.org?subject=unsubscribe>
	<mailto:vox-request@lists.lugod.org?subject=subscribe>
Date sent:      	Thu, 8 May 2003 13:52:39 -0700

> On Thu, May 08, 2003 at 01:29:34PM -0700, Tim Riley wrote:
> > Ken observed that Microsoft tried to hinder OS/2's growth by forcing an 
> > exclusive contract with IBM. Whereas this may seem like a monopolistic 
> > action, I think any company would refuse to sell to a competing company 
> > its products at wholesale.
> 
> Ah, but the difference is that only a monopolist can leverage their
> advantage in forcing vendors to not supply competing products.  If I
> don't hold a monopoly, than I can't stand the risk of telling my vendors
> what they can and can't sell -- I need all the vendors that I can get to
> sell my product, and if my product is good, sales will take care of
> themselves.
> 
> Using monopolist powers to prevent vendors from selling what they choose
> provides an unfair advantage against other companies in the marketplace[1],
> and is quite illegal to boot.
> 
> [1] This actually goes against capitalist ideals; e.g., the 'ideal'
>     capitalist wants his products to stand on their own merits -- if he
>     needs to use force to promote them, then he deserves to be kicked out of
>     the marketplace.

See John Locke (17th century english philosopher) on 
"Natural Law" and "Property Rights". 

The philosophical foundation of the USA constitution was 
mainly derived from Locke's work.

Monopolists are basically trying to reverse the social 
evolution towards "higher order" consciousness, compassion,
democracy, property rights, and so forth, and recreate some 
elements of mercantilist economic system (like a corrupt
aristocracy).

In other words, it is hard to imagine that any penalties
against monopolistic business practices could be overly
harsh.

regards,
ep