One could also say:
"Each generation of Americans have their own European bogeyman from King George down to de Gaulle..."
But, seriously, Standard Oil, AT&T and IBM were each restrained by operation of law within America. A fair observer would say that American Law has failed in this regard, in the case of Microsoft. You may say that that law against monopolies is not a good law. Fair enough.
However, if we are to maintain this global system of trading, we have to be ready to compromise. The global system should not be built only according to the wishes of America, and in particular, large American Corporations.
Now that another jurisdiction's laws apply in a way different than those in America believe they should apply, suddenly, somehow, it has to be UNFAIR.
Well, that is how the rest of the world feels when America forces laws similar to the DMCA act down their throats. This is to say nothing of TRIPS and the WTO. It seems that America almost always gets the world trading rules written to its specifications. Sometimes, though some other values from some other countries seep in that are foreign to interests of large American corporations.
My response: Welcome to Globalization.
Given the dangers to liberty that large corporations represent (the DMCA is only the tip of the iceberg) it is in the interests of the American people to see the power of these corporations diminished.
Oh, and BTW, Microsoft has been given every chance to comply with the rules of the EU. They have ignored those laws and been extremely arrogant. At a minimum, one should read the testimony of Andrew Tridgell (the author of Samba) for an explanation of why Microsoft did not comply, and what it should have done.
It is notable that one of the supposed 'commentators' on the EU's treatment of Microsoft over at IPCentral, Mr. Noel Le, did not even know who Andrew Tridgell was. How can that be?
