Ethical Analysis of Microsoft and Its Business Actions
The Microsoft Corporation dominates the environment in which they operate. Has this power in the software industry violated moral, civil, or ethical rights? Is Microsoft operating as a monopoly? These are only a few questions that have been deliberated over the last twelve years of litigation and this analysis attempts to evaluate from an ethical point of view. We feel Microsoft has operated as an aggressive competitor in an attempt to satisfy their stockholders. However, through injurious competition, Microsoft has abandoned outside stakeholders and their rights. The actions of regulators and competitor can be explained from the Rights Theory point of view; while the blatant actions of Microsoft can be viewed from a Utilitarian standpoint. There is an ethical dilemma present within the Microsoft case. By examining a variety of ethical theories a possible solution to this dilemma is revealed. Microsoft is an aggressive competitor and maintains this position to present day. The competition and federal regulators feel Microsoft’s business practices have been injurious, with very little balance between aggressive and injurious competition. ... Has Microsoft intentionally attempted to block out the competition? In 1990, the FTC looked at charges that Microsoft’s pricing policies illegally blocked competitors out of markets and deliberately built hidden codes into its operating system, Windows, to stop competing applications (Sugawara). Microsoft maintained their position and innocence as an aggressive competitor. ... Perhaps the most public example of Microsoft’s damaging competitive tactics included the bundling of their web browser, Internet Explorer, with all versions of Windows sold. This successfully impacted the Netscape Communications Corporation who argued that Microsoft unfairly offered computer makers financial “inducements” for giving Microsoft’s Internet software an exclusive spot on their computers (Chandrasekaran). A 2002 Justice Department settlement set new rules for Microsoft that in turn would have an impact on thousands of companies whose programs run on Microsoft Windows. This settlement required Microsoft to make portions of Windows software code available to competitors so they could ensure that their products worked with the operating system. Additionally, computer makers would be allowed to pick and choose which Microsoft products were loaded onto their machines (Hamm). Microsoft’s injurious business tactics were successful in stonewalling the competition and gaining control of the market. ... Utilitarianism is a belief that the purpose or function of morality is to promote the welfare of humans by maximizing the benefits from an action, or series of actions, while minimizing harm from those same actions (Beauchamp & Bowie).