A Response to Edwin A. Locke, Ph.D.
December 1999

Dr. Edwin A. Locke, a Senior Policy Analyst for the Center for the Moral Defense of Capitalism, created an article in response to Judge Jackson's Findings of Fact that Dr. Locke entitled "Judge Jackson's Findings of Fiction." Dr. Locke presents several statements which he proposes as fiction and attempts to justify those conclusions. However, Dr. Locke's arguments can be misleading, incomplete, idealistic, or completely false. In an attempt to present both sides of this issue, the following responses to Dr. Locke's conclusions are presented for your consideration.

Summaries of Dr. Locke's argument are presented here, but the reader is encouraged to read the full text of Dr. Locke's essay and then this complete response in order to create an informed personal opinion on the matters presented.

• Argument #1: Microsoft is a "monopoly."
• Argument #2: Microsoft's "monopoly power" allows it to "coerce" its customers.
• Argument #3: Microsoft harmed consumers.
• Argument #4: Microsoft is a threat to consumers because it "could" raise its prices.
• Argument #5: Blocking Microsoft's ability to compete will foster greater industry innovation.