The article addresses the issue of anti-trust laws and how they relate to the case of the Microsoft Company. According to critics, Microsoft has intentionally dominated the computer market by means of practices such as including a free Internet Browser in their Windows software. Furthermore, the company is accused of unfair practices such as leveraging their existing control to further dominate not only the computer market, but other information-related markets as well.
             To examine the issue, a brief history of anti-trust laws is given. From the first section of the article, it becomes clear that anti-trust laws have been established approximately a century before the advance of computers and the information age. It is also mentioned that the original intention of these laws was to protect the consumer; a more competitive market means more competitive prices for the end consumer, whereas a monopoly of the market would mean that the specific company has control over pricing without the need for considering the competition. The latter practice would then drive prices up. Anti-trust laws were therefore created with fairness towards the consumer in mind; no company was allowed to engage in unfair or monopolistic practices to drive prices towards their own advantage.
             This explanation is followed by an in-depth discussion of the debate regarding Microsoft and its practices. On the one hand, there are the critics who regard Microsoft as an unfair monopolist of the computer market. The main claim is that Microsoft offers consumers an apparently very desirable product in order to eliminate competition rather than for the benefit of the consumers themselves. Once in control of the market, it is claimed that the company would increase prices to benefit themselves. It is interesting to note that the above criticisms are generally forthcoming from the company's competitors, and not from consumers.
             ...