Topic: IBM Anticompetitive In Mainframes

[Nemesis]

Link to full article

T3 contends that IBM pens in mainframe customers faced with a high cost of switching to other systems, while refusing to share blueprints necessary to offer a cheaper alternative.

Until roughly a decade ago, large competitors in the market for mainframes compatible with IBM software included Amdahl Corp. and Hitachi Data Systems. (HIT)

When those rivals pulled out, IBM continued investing. "Customers need to go to IBM now to buy new hardware to continue operating those systems," said IDC analyst Jean Bozman. "They don't have anyone else selling that particular thing."

More recently, companies such as T3 and Platform Solutions Inc., which was spun out of Amdahl, developed technology enabling the use of IBM mainframe software on less expensive hardware. IBM, however, sued Platform Solutions for patent infringement in 2006, and Platform Solutions later countersued IBM in conjunction with T3 for alleged antitrust violations. IBM ultimately acquired Platform Solutions last year.

Antitrust regulators are more likely to be interested in businesses with "network effects," or a connection between the value of a product and the number of people using it, such as software operating systems or Internet search, according to Harkrider.

[toasty0]

I recommend for anyone who wishes to have an understanding of this in a historical context should read Who Says Elephants Can't Dance? Inside IBM's Historic Turnaround

[Sirgod]

WoW Jerry some of those comments there where harsh. I wonder if there is a lot more to the whole IBM thing , as in someone trying to harm them with Negative reports etc.

Stephen

[Sarek]

Probably disgruntled ex-employees of IBM or Lotus.  He couldn't have done too badly, IBM was on the ropes in the early 90s and it's still around.

[toasty0]

Read the book Stephen. I promise you won't regret it.

[Nemesis]

I'm not very knowledgeable about mainframes.  So I can't say a lot about the validity of this case.  I do have some observations however.

Under antitrust laws I only know 2 reasons to be found guilty.

1/ Using your monopoly to exclude competition (example Microsofts pay us per computer sold licensing)

2/ Using  your monopoly in one field to extend it into another (Microsoft using its Windows monopoly to fight Netscape for an example).

I don't see from the articles I have seen that IBM is being accused of either of those. 

T3 is asking for IBM to provide blueprints but I haven't seen how they justify this.

[Dracho]

Unless the patent is expired I don't see how a company can argue that another company should give them the means to make a competing product, using their own designs.  That's nucking futs.

That's like a bank robber demanding blueprints so he can plan his bank heist.

[Nemesis]

If they are asking for interface specifications so they can make "add-on" hardware then I would understand.  That would be like the networking specifications Microsoft has been ordered to provide.

Asking for actual blueprints seems wrong to me too.