pokoko said:
No, that's from the famous Atari lawsuit about the lockout chip. The jury was unable to reach verdicts on the question of whether Nintendo's licensing agreement was an unreasonable restraint of trade, or whether this program was the means by which Nintendo acquired monopoly power. Judge Fern M. Smith, who presided over the trial, granted a mistrial on those two counts and said she still was considering Nintendo's request to dismiss them. 'We are disappointed the jury did not understand the negative impacts Nintendo's exclusive contracts had on competition because of Nintendo's power over its suppliers and customers,' said William Jaeger, an attorney representing Atari. http://www.upi.com/Archives/1992/05/01/Nintendo-wins-antitrust-suit/4471704692800/
I did find out something amusing, though. Regarding the antitrust fine Nintendo was levied in the EU: "Every year, millions of European families spend large amounts of money on video games," Competition Commissioner Mario Monti said. "They have the right to buy the games and consoles at the lowest price the market can possibly offer. "We will not tolerate... behaviour intended to keep prices artificially high in the European single market." |
Oh, I see now. Thank you.
