Anti-trust Legislation believe that anti-trust legislation should be reformed. The main reasons for it are that the 19th century antitrust laws, i.e. Sherman Act, 1890 and Clayton Act, 1914, currently cannot be applied successfully in 21st century computer and telecommunications marketplace (Glanz, 33). This became evident in the case between Microsoft and the Justice Department. The biggest problem was that the Justice Department was applying 19th century law on the computer business, without heeding the fact that the nature of technology is different from that of the traditional goods. For example, Microsoft currently licenses its Windows operating system to PC makers on condition that they must also use its Internet browser Explorer. However, according to the Justice Department it was a monopoly, a clear case of antitrust legislation, even though it was evident that an integrated suit of technology makes economic as well as common sense. The other reason for reforming the antirust legislation is that government often cannot know the complexities of present day business, so any interference of government in business has a direct negative effect on the competitiveness of the firm. At a time, when businesses are competing globally, application of 19th century antitrust legislation is unlikely to make the playing field equal; it would rather erode the very foundation of the capitalism. Undoubtedly, government should ensure the fairness of competition for all of the companies and ensure that a company does not stall the entry of other companies in a business, however, government should also reconsider how and which kinds of firms are best suited for the application of the traditional laws (Reich, 302). If government does not reconsider or reform traditionally formulated legislations, the government is likely to make bad choices.
References
Glanz, William, "Digital Dirty Dozen," Insight on the News, Vol. 18, Issue 10, (2002): 33.
Reich, Robert B. The Work of Nations: Preparing Ourselves for the 21st Century, New York, Knopf, 1991: 301-305.
