In the U. S. government's 1998 suit against the Microsoft Corporation, a central issue was whether Microsoft should be allowed to integrate its Internet browser into its Windows operating system. Microsoft responded that:
a. this integration of products is an example of tying, and the U. S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled that tying is a perfectly acceptable and legal business practice.
b. this integration of products is an example of resale price maintenance, and the U. S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled that fair trade is a perfectly acceptable and legal business practice
c. putting new features into old products is a natural part of technological practice.
d. it would discontinue this integration of products, provided a speedy resolution of the government's case could be reached

Microsoft responded that

this integration of products is an example of tying, and the U.S. Supreme Court has consistently ruled that tying is a perfectly acceptable and legal business practice.

Explanation: The suit accused Microsoft of illegally protecting its operating-system monopoly and seeking a new monopoly for its own browser, Internet Explorer. The fear was that Microsoft would kill Netscape, monopolize the browser market and use that point of control to dominate the coming age of the web.

Despite the creative editing of video, facts, and emails, Microsoft lost the case. The presiding judge, Thomas Penfield Jackson, ruled that Microsoft violated parts of the Sherman Antitrust Act, which was established in 1890 to outlaw monopolies and cartels.

i would go with get a bachelor’s degree

hope i

-lavira : )