Daniel Beard, Apr 24, 2008
The Microsoft judgment was a big decision in the sense that it is long and concerns an important company. If it can be called a landmark decision, what sort of landmark is it? This article considers whether at least on the interoperability side of the case the Microsoft judgment can really be seen as important and, in doing so, makes certain observations about the tests applied and problems remaining in relation to refusal to supply cases. The article concludes that, at least on the interoperability side of the case, the decision does not break new ground and leaves unresolved various problems in relation to the relevant legal tests.
Featured News
US President Raises Antitrust Worries Over Netflix–Warner Bros. Deal
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
Freshfields Adds Former DOJ Antitrust Leader as Partner in San Francisco
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
Appeals Court Lifts Injunction, Allowing Florida to Enforce Social Media Age Restriction Law
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
EU Gives Green Light to Mars’ $36 Billion Acquisition of Kellanova
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
EU Forces Meta to Give Users Ad Personalization Options
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Intellectual Property
Nov 19, 2025 by
CPI
Dealing in Intellectual Property: IP Justifications and Defenses in Digital Markets Cases
Nov 19, 2025 by
Jennifer Dixton
The Evolving Role of Innovation Theories of Harm in the Antitrust Analysis of Life Science Mergers
Nov 19, 2025 by
Michelle Yost Hale, Matthew D. McDonald & Merrill Stovroff
Who Can Fix It? Antitrust, IP Rights, and the Right to Repair
Nov 19, 2025 by
Rosa M. Morales
Copyright, Antitrust, and the Politics of Generative AI
Nov 19, 2025 by
Daryl Lim