Microsoft, Google and Laws

Exactly, It's not so much the law that bothers me, it is that it's not consistent and seems to only target certain companies or certain type of products.

Should car manufacturers start patenting doors, locks, imobilsers, tyres?

I don't understand it either.

Especially in this web browser case. Why is it only Microsoft that has to follow this rule that they have to give you explicit options to install other browsers? Do you get the same thing on OSX? Safari comes as standard on iPhones and iPads. When you get a new one you don't get presented options for other browsers when you first set it up.

Microsoft are only being punished because they were successful. Supposedly they were "abusing their position" by giving their browser an advantage because their OS was so popular. Even though all their competitors do the same. The reasoning doesn't even apply any more. Microsoft's competitors are gaining a lot of ground on them. MS certainly don't have a monopoly on consumer operating systems any more if you consider how many people are switching to using their phones and tablets for things they used to use a PC for. I also don't see why different rules should apply to PCs, phones and tablets. They're all consumer oriented computers at the end of the day, there is no fundamental difference in what they actually are.

Back in the day there were companies that sold internet browsers. Essentially that was all they did.

Microsoft which sold many products then started giving away internet browsers for free. They didn't give away Windows 95 or Office or Encarta but they did give away Internet Explorer. That was seen as uncompetitive because they were using the profits of their other products to drive the sellers of a competing product out of business.

Microsoft are reaping what they sowed. Due to their breach of competition law they were required essentially to promote other people's products.

Essentially you don't care because you do not own or work for the maker of a competing product.

Competition law doesn't only apply to computers. There are many sectors where companies are fined for uncompetitive activities.

Well if that's the case, then it should no longer apply right? Pretty much all browsers are free now. So I don't see why Microsoft should continue to be punished for it.

And actually the company I work for actually does compete with Microsoft in some ways (I'm a game developer and they make competing games). Although overall we benefit from having a relationship with Microsoft.

I've just thought of a similar situation. Sometimes when a big game comes out, the big supermarkets sell it very cheap. So cheap they're probably making a loss on it. But they can do it because it brings people into the shop where a lot of them will buy lots of other things while they're there. That sounds like pretty much the same thing you're talking about. They're potentially driving competitors out of business because they can leverage their other products to sell games cheap. Are supermarkets being fined for that?