Today Microsoft is a household name. It's the name of a multibillion-dollar company whose software is present in the vast majority of computers today. Its operating system, Windows, is found on almost all store-purchased computers. One of its founders, Bill Gates, is the richest and best-known person in the world. However, all this success is not accompanied by controversy and questionable business ethics. There is evidence to support the claim that Microsoft created a software monopoly through unfair trade practices. Say no to plagiarism. Get a tailor-made essay on "Why Violent Video Games Shouldn't Be Banned"? Get an original essay A court ruled that Microsoft violated sections of the Sherman Act, created to preserve a competitive marketplace and protect consumers from abuse and prevent actions that would harm competition. The court case documents state: “Section 1 regulates combinations and prohibits those that restrict trade. Agreements to fix prices, divide markets and tie up unrelated goods are most likely in violation of section 1” (Cohen). Microsoft's bundling of Internet Explorer with its operating system appears to have violated this rule. The documents also state that “certain behavior by monopolists, companies that can command a supracompetitive price in a defined market. According to section 2, monopolists cannot intentionally acquire their market power, nor can they intentionally maintain market power obtained through superior business acumen or by chance” (Cohen). Furthermore, “Finally, a firm is liable for attempted monopolization if, with the intention to monopolize, it engages in anticompetitive behavior and has a dangerous likelihood of success” (Cohen). It seems that Microsoft has violated this rule by bundling the Windows operating system with almost every computer on the market. There was a case involving Microsoft that involved resolving these issues, United States v. Microsoft. The violations and monopolization allegations go into more detail in the case. The court had "upheld the district court's finding that Microsoft had unlawfully maintained a monopoly on Intel-compatible PC operating systems." (Cohen) This shows that the court agrees with the prosecution. However, “Citing Microsoft's diminished liability, the Court of Appeals reversed the district court's dissolution order” (Cohen). This means that the order to split Microsoft into multiple companies has been cancelled. Instead, a negotiation had to be made. This was seen when Cohen writes: “During remand, Member States and the Department of Justice withdrew the tied-sale request and proceeded to negotiate a settlement” (Cohen). However, will the negotiation plan be enough to limit Microsoft? A subtitle of the document written by Cohen, "Anti-Retaliation and Uniform Licensing Provisions", lists various unethical business practices adopted by Microsoft. One says that "Microsoft threatened to support the '3DX' technology of AMD, an Intel competitor, if Intel did not stop helping Sun Microsystems by developing a fast, cross-platform virtual machine using Sun's Java standards" (Cohen). Another also says that "Microsoft also threatened to stop supporting and developing its Mac Office program, used by ninety percent of Macintosh users who use an office suite, if Apple Computer continued to include Netscape as the default browser" ( Cohen). As a result of these actions, the court found that Microsoft “violated section 2.