>Faustus von Goethe wrote:
>
> > If you then turn around and (ignoring the law) use strongarm tactics and
> > empty threats to discourage competition in that realm, you are in fact
> > guilty of anticompetetive tactics. Make yourself a monopoly (or near
> > monopoly, as TSR was) and you are violating both federal and state
>statutes.
>
>One of the major problems with determining who is a monopolist under
>antitrust
>laws is defining the relevant market. Both sides of an antitrust argument
>will
>usually be arguing that the market for the products in question should be
>decided differently. IMHO, it is unlikely that a judge would find that TSR
>constituted a monopoly, under traditional antitrust interpretations, in any
>relevant market (whether RPGs or games in general - the market in one's own
>product alone [D&D] clearly would not be a relevant market for the
>determination
>of monopolist status as copyright law permissibly grants a monopoly in that
>product).
Point taken. Thanks for the clarification. Do actions "in restraint of
trade" need to come from a monopolist to be illegal, or are you just
providing a correction on principle?
Faust
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com
-------------
For more information, please link to www.opengamingfoundation.org
