If Everyone's Using Your Pirated Software, Are You Still A Monopolist?
from the questions-questions-questions dept
Apparently there's a new antitrust law in China that has local software companies scrambling to file suit against Microsoft for violating the law. However, Business Week has a rather pertinent question: if the vast majority of the Microsoft software in use in China is of the "pirated" variety, can Microsoft actually be held responsible for antitrust violations? After all, it's not directly responsible for that "monopoly" in the first place.
Reader Comments (rss)
(Flattened / Threaded)
wat?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
yes... yes it can... next useless newspost please.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Ok they are suing M$ for being ubiquitous through rampant piracy and some sales.
I guess this kinda makes sense if you are trying to sell your own operating system or web browser and the competition is as good as giving their wares away to achieve a kinda of market domination. They got sued by the EU for something like that.
I suspect that the Chinese government will make this issue go away.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
LOL
HA ha ha ha ha! The screwer has now become the screwed!
God, how I longed for this day!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Silly
So Microsoft will be forced to stop doing business in a country where they're not doing business, just having their software pirated? Man, Microsoft sure is screwed. I guess they'll just have to limit their business to paying customers (the horror!)
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Oh Riely ?
LOL, it seems the Cowards Anonymous, are without clue.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
moronic.
looks like China is getting their own little pool of scumbags (aka attorneys) ready to litigate at the drop of a hat.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Umm, just because many people are too stupid to use Linux, doesn't mean Microsoft has a Monopoly.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
WHAT??
According to you:
All chinese men have small penises
All chinese are bad drivers.
.
.
and all chinese use pirated software.
Grow up dude!
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
What the heck
What's sad is the article has "local software companies scrambling to file suit against Microsoft for violating the law"
At least we know know that the US are not the only ones that are sue happy.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: WHAT??
Um. There's a huge difference between a factual statement, noting that much of the software in use in China is pirated, and making a stereotype about "all" of anything.
I made no stereotyped comment about the Chinese. I merely pointed out that *if* so much software in China is pirated, as is established fact (not all, but much of it), then does that raise questions about the antitrust claim.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Pirated Software = China
Sorry, but I think any one in China really buys ANY software.
In the embroidery world, the #1 application used by the majority of the embroidery shops in China has only one sale to someone in China. That's right, the #1 app, has literally one legit sale to that part of world.
Freedom
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Re: WHAT??
It's a statistical fact, not a stereotype.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Depends only on Chinese law
It depends only on Chinese law, and more importantly how that law is interpreted. Legal opinions by us Americans is irrelevant.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
lost sale
Does all of that piracy count as lost sales, or is it just a pointer to MS that they should start selling something else in China?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
"dumping"
It's an interesting situation to be sure. When Microsoft sells their software hugely below cost to maintain a monopoly position, that's likely to be seen as illegal 'dumping'. But there's nothing illegal about having copy protection that sucks.
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Actually...
Maybe the flip-side of restrictive license models is that, having *tried* to enforce a paying system, they should be responsible for breaches of the algorithms used too?
(reply to this comment) (link to this comment)
Add Your Comment