But, these same developments place heavy pressures on rival businesses, which must keep pace or lose their competitive races. Rivals can legitimately respond by improving their own products or by lowering prices. Increasingly, however, some firms have sought to handicap their rivals' races by turning to the government for protection." (Theroux) This is significant, because it shows that Microsoft's greatest strength was their ability to innovate, as the article highlights what the perceived government actions could do. As a result, this argument would be effective in helping to have their cases against them, overturned in the U.S. Court of Appeals. Delineate which market participants benefited from the final court decision and whose interests were harmed.

The company that benefited the most from this decision was obviously Microsoft. As they could use the final ruling to be able to maintain their market share and not have to worry about the possibility of being broken up. This is important, because the decision would mean that future actions taken against the company would be more watered down.

The different losers in the case would include a host companies such as: Sun Microsystems, Oracle, Apple and Red Hat. Where, they would feel that Microsoft was not complying with any kind of decision and maintaining their dominance. Commenting about what was taking place Sun Microsystems would release the following statement, "The weak steps that Microsoft has taken to comply with the requirements already show that the settlement...

We will continue to pursue our civil case and to cooperate with the European Commission's case against Microsoft to ensure that the company does not continue to use its monopoly position to become the gatekeeper of the Internet." (McCalllaugh) This is important, because it shows how the Microsoft ruling will make it more difficult on competitors. As the company will be able to maintain its dominance in the marketplace and could settle the case (without any major disruptions to its businesses). That being said, this ruling would also have an impact upon possible actions taken against Microsoft overseas. As many competitors (such as Sun Microsystems) have stated that they will continue to work with overseas regulators to hold the company accountable (i.e. The European Commission). This is important, because it shows how the case could be a victory for competitors, as a favorable ruling in the European Court would force the company to cease with such practices in one way or another. As result, the case will have both positive and negative implications for competitors.
Bibliography

In United States District Court. U.S. Justice Department, 1998. Web. 31 Oct. 2010.

McCalllaugh, Declan. "Rivals Come Up Short in Decision." CNET, 2002. Web. 31 Oct. 2010.

Theroux, David. "Open Letter on Anti-Trust Protectionism." Independent, 1999. Web. 31 Oct. 2010.

MLA Format http://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/747/08/