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
New Mexico Jury Orders Meta to Pay $375 Million in Consumer Protection Case
Mar 24, 2026 by
CPI
CVS Health Nears FTC Settlement Over Insulin Pricing Practices
Mar 24, 2026 by
CPI
South Korean Food Giant CJ Cheiljedang Apologizes Again in Sugar Collusion Case
Mar 24, 2026 by
CPI
EU Competition Chief to Press Big Tech on AI Power During US Visit
Mar 24, 2026 by
CPI
Colorado Eying Possible Do-Over of Landmark AI Law
Mar 24, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Data-Driven Competition
Mar 19, 2026 by
CPI
Data-Driven Competition: Implications For Enforcement and Merger Control
Mar 19, 2026 by
Alexandre de Corniere & Greg Taylor
From Tipping to Trustees: Why Data-Driven Markets Require Institutional Design, Not Optimization
Mar 19, 2026 by
Jens Prüfer & Paul de Bijl
Data Barriers to Entry: What We’ve Learned About Spotting Them and What We Still Don’t Know About Solutions
Mar 19, 2026 by
Bruno Carballa-Smichowski
When the Perfect Is the Enemy of the Good: Price Discrimination, Affordability, Precarity and Market Dynamism
Mar 19, 2026 by
Dan Ciuriak