david.schreiber@canremote.uucp (DAVID SCHREIBER) (03/11/90)
It is IMPOSSIBLE for Nintendo to be sing "monopolistic" practices against Atari. Check your dictionary. To me, your message sounds like standard American sour grapes whne they lose out to better companies. In Canada we are used to all sorts of unfair practices coming from the Americans, so few of us feel the least bit of sympathy when they're outwitted by somebody else. --- * Via ProDoor 3.1R
steve@thelake.mn.org (Steve Yelvington) (03/13/90)
[In article <90031201022042@masnet.uucp>,
david.schreiber@canremote.uucp (DAVID SCHREIBER) writes ... ]
> It is IMPOSSIBLE for Nintendo to be sing "monopolistic" practices
> against Atari. Check your dictionary.
Oh, really? It says:
mo*nop*o*ly 1. exclusive control of a commodity or service in a given
market, or control that makes possible the fixing of prices and the
virtual elimination of free competition.
According to the Associated Press, Rep. Dennis Eckart of Ohio, chairman of
the House small business subcommittee on antitrust, asked the U.S. Justice
Department's antitrust division last December to investigate Nintendo.
Nintendo controls 80 percent or more of the videogames market. That in
itself is not monopolistic, but:
* He accused Nintendo of intimidating retailers to keep competitors off
toy store shelves.
* He said Nintendo has used exclusive software arrangements and physical
computer-chip barriers to control the market. Nintendo installs a
"lock-out chip" in each cartridge, and only licensed game cartridges
including that chip can be used on Nintendo players.
* He said Nintendo had created artificial shortages of some games sold by
licensed software producers.
* He said the result of Nintendo's marketing practices is that only games
licensed or sold by Nintendo can be played on the Nintendo players,
blocking independent software publishers and inflating the costs of games
to consumers by an estimated 20 percent to 30 percent.
I don't think anyone is close to filing any criminal charges, but similar
allegations are contained in the Atari Games (Tengen) civil suit. (Atari
Games is not affiliated with Atari Corp.)
--
Steve Yelvington at the lake in Minnesota
UUCP path: ... umn-cs.cs.umn.edu!thelake!steverobert@infmx.UUCP (Robert Coleman) (03/13/90)
In article <90031201022042@masnet.uucp> david.schreiber@canremote.uucp (DAVID SCHREIBER) writes: >It is IMPOSSIBLE for Nintendo to be sing "monopolistic" practices >against Atari. Check your dictionary. To me, your message sounds like >standard American sour grapes whne they lose out to better companies. In >Canada we are used to all sorts of unfair practices coming from the >Americans, so few of us feel the least bit of sympathy when they're >outwitted by somebody else. My, how nationalistic can we get? Gee, I sure hope that someday, somehow, the Great and Noble country of Canada will be able to triumph over the Evil Americans. Isn't it funny how when we (including me, apparently, though I've never been involved in any way with inter-country trade) do it to you, it's "unfair practices" and when someone else does it to us it's "outwitting"? This isn't the appropriate newsgroup for paranoic nationalistic generalizations. This newsgroup is for paranoic computer-loyalistic generalizations ;-) . As far as Nintendo is concerned, you're clearly passing judgement without any knowledge of what the complaint is. Perhaps you should *ask* the details first? You may still feel the way you do afterwards (though I should point out that the "monopolistic" practices under discussion would apply to Canadian companies as well as American companies, so if, as is apparently the case, you only care if it happens to Canada, then you might change your tune) but at least you'd sound like you knew what you were talking about. Robert C. -- "Helen's the only one who knows what scruples are, and she won't tell us" John said. "Have we got scruples about it, Helen?" "Not a trace," Helen affirmed. -The Reefs of Earth, R.A.Lafferty
johns@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca (Conan the Barbarian) (03/13/90)
In article <A1434195052@thelake.mn.org> steve@thelake.mn.org (Steve Yelvington) writes: >[In article <90031201022042@masnet.uucp>, > david.schreiber@canremote.uucp (DAVID SCHREIBER) writes ... ] >> [ some rude remarks about Americans and monopolies ] > [ some real info on the story - thanks a lot for the post, Steve ] Yes it is true, that some Americans know very little about what goes on north of the 49th parallel, but I still *hate* remarks like these. I've met some pretty ignorant Canadians too. And, I actually *like* to see a Canuck Buck that isn't worth as much as the Yankee Dollar. :-) That is, from a pro-Canadian economic point of view. -- John Schmitt johns@maccs.dcss.mcmaster.ca ...!unet!utai!utgpu!maccs!johns
rick@jhunix.HCF.JHU.EDU (Eric Ruck) (03/13/90)
Regarding this Nintendo thing, another interesting note: From the _Atlantic Monthly_, March 1990: "Editors' Note Lawyers for Nintendo of America have informed us that people who use the term _Nintendo neck_ (Word Watch, December _Atlantic_) are doing so without authorization. The lawyers want us to use the term _video- game neck_ instead. _Caveat orator._" Eric