Re: Offtopic, inappropriate jokes?

["SN_Diamond" <Norman.Diamond@example.com>]

Matt Doughty

> I also thought antitrust laws were there to prevent a couple other abuses
> of success:
> 1. using excessive wealth, or profits in other areas to undercut competition
>    without similar resources until they colapse finacially effectively
>    eliminating compentition.
> 2. Using dominance in one area to corner the market in another area
>    (railroads and shipping, or OS and Browser)

And tying, such as refusing to sell a typewriter unless the buyer contracts
to buy ribbons from the same maker, and refusing to sell a computer unless
the buyer contracts to buy an OS from the same maker.  Funny how IBM decided
to comply.

And tying, such as refusing to sell a computer unless the buyer contracts to
buy an OS from the maker's co-conspirator -- in fact usually an excessively
badly broken, maliciously damaging OS even when the buyer might be willing
to tolerate a moderately broken, not particularly damaging OS from the same
co-conspirator.  Funny how makers don't decide to comply.  Funny how an evil
empire has so much control over dozens of makers.  Funny how governments
decide not enforce existing antitrust laws.  Funny how governments decide
not to enforce product liability laws.

If buyers got a choice, just imagine how many Linux vendors would be able to
afford to whip their products into top shape, and how many would have the
incentive to do so.

-- Norman Diamond