The Shrine

Claiming anti-trust, which the FCC already looked at, since the 2K games clearly drove down the price

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?optio ... 7&Itemid=2

I'm interested to see where this goes

Zeus wrote:Claiming anti-trust, which the FCC already looked at, since the 2K games clearly drove down the price

http://www.next-gen.biz/index.php?optio ... 7&Itemid=2

I'm interested to see where this goes

It goes no where. When are people going to learn, STOP FEEDING THE TRIAL LAWYERS!!!

Well, actually, it is an interesting argument. When does free market begin and monopolizing a franchise end? Is EA monopolizing the NFL license and preventing competition from potentially selling a better game? What about when TV stations get a hold of a exclusive NFL license to watch TV?

However, this type of exclusive contract is too embedded into our culture to separate now. A judge will likely dismiss it for this reason (though he won't phrase it that way).

Hmmm... interesting debate. What EA did with the NFL basically did create a monopoly, but as Sine said it brings in issues with drawing a line between exclusivity contracts and monopolies. I think I'd almost debate that exclusivity contracts can only be done in certain situations... I mean if Microsoft signed an exclusivity contract with Dell that would be a monopoly and anti-competitive wouldn't it?

I dunno, not a clear cut decision...

Keep in mind that monopolies are not inherently illegal. It's the abuse of a monopoly that's illegal.

Like when NFL2k whatever came out and was 19.99 and Madden cut down to 29.99, then NFL2k died and it was back up to 49.99 the following year.

Yeah, I think that would qualify as an abuse of a monopoly.

Kupek wrote:Keep in mind that monopolies are not inherently illegal. It's the abuse of a monopoly that's illegal.

These are not exclusive ideas. By nature, a monopoly is abused and is illegal...unless it's a gov't-sponsored one

Yes, power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

All business follow the same instincts. Monopolies behave in a predictable fashion.

SineSwiper wrote:Yes, power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

All business follow the same instincts. Monopolies behave in a predictable fashion.

As do ex-monopolies. Ask a Canadian how well they're treated by Rogers' or Bell's CSRs....

Zeus wrote:

SineSwiper wrote:Yes, power corrupts. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.

All business follow the same instincts. Monopolies behave in a predictable fashion.

As do ex-monopolies. Ask a Canadian how well they're treated by Rogers' or Bell's CSRs....

Hey, my company hires, trains, and manages those CSR's (albeit to Rogers/BC's liking). Just be comforted by the fact that yours truly makes it impossible for those minimally-waged CSR's to surf the web while talking to you

Zeus wrote:As do ex-monopolies. Ask a Canadian how well they're treated by Rogers' or Bell's CSRs....

That's not completely true. Our cable company got smart, got out of the public stock market, and started focusing on customers. Now, we're the one of the best performing cable companies in the US.

SineSwiper wrote:

Zeus wrote:As do ex-monopolies. Ask a Canadian how well they're treated by Rogers' or Bell's CSRs....

That's not completely true. Our cable company got smart, got out of the public stock market, and started focusing on customers. Now, we're the one of the best performing cable companies in the US.

Yeah, but you don't have a governmental body prohibiting competition down there. Our FCC-equivalent (CRTC) is a fucking Nazi old-boys club which don't allow no one in. There's a reason these ex-monopolies still think they can act as such