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
Bank Regulators Clarify That Crypto Qualifies as Collateral Under Capital Reserves Rule
Mar 6, 2026 by
CPI
States Are Drawing a Hard Line on AI in the Workplace
Mar 6, 2026 by
CPI
States Prepare New Legal Challenge to Trump’s Global Tariffs
Mar 5, 2026 by
CPI
OpenAI Accused in Chicago Lawsuit of Acting as Unlicensed Legal Advisor
Mar 5, 2026 by
CPI
Senate Democrats Target Meatpacking Giants With New Antitrust Bill
Mar 5, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Behavioral Economics
Feb 22, 2026 by
CPI
Behavioral Antitrust in 2026
Feb 22, 2026 by
Maurice Stucke
Behavioral Economics in Competition Policy: Going Beyond Inertia and Framing Effects
Feb 22, 2026 by
Annemieke Tuinstra & Richard May
Agreeing to Disagree in Antitrust
Feb 22, 2026 by
Jorge Padilla
Recognizing What’s Around the Corner: Merger Control, Capabilities, and the New Nature of Potential Competition
Feb 22, 2026 by
Magdalena Kuyterink & David J. Teece