Legal and contracting experts say the administration’s deals with Microsoft never should have come to pass, as they sidestep or even possibly violate federal procurement and antitrust laws. https://t.co/AxJJX9Parl
Is it an issue that a business can use cross selling and tying one thing to another, and with giveaways (free or below cost) to increase lock-in (not just in tech; as FTC views Microsoft is linking AZURE to other parts of the business)?
“In the years after Nadella made his commitment to Biden, Microsoft’s goals became reality. The Department of Defense, which had resisted the upgrades for years due to the steep cost, began paying for them once the free trial ended…” https://t.co/4hSKJfzouG
Microsoft is currently under regulatory scrutiny regarding its suite of office products, as well as facing simultaneous lawsuits from both the outgoing Biden Administration's Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and an incoming Trump Administration cabinet member. This scrutiny follows Microsoft's offer of $150 million in technology services to the U.S. government, which has been criticized as a strategic move to solidify its dominance in federal business and limit competition. The company's approach included providing a free year of its premium cybersecurity services, which experts claim was designed to increase government dependency on Microsoft and create high switching costs for competitors. Legal experts have raised concerns that these deals may violate federal procurement and antitrust laws. Additionally, some involved in the negotiations have compared Microsoft's tactics to a drug dealer offering free samples to secure long-term customers, suggesting that the strategy effectively locks in clients once the free services are withdrawn.