The Department of Justice opened an investigation of Verisign's acquisition of Thawte. My contact there is Kent Brown <kent.brown@usdoj.gov> 202-307-6146
Entrust filed a suit against Verisign - see below for the URL.
My letter to newcase.atr@usdoj.gov 1999-12-21:
As a long-time observer of the Internet I'm alarmed to see that Verisign, the dominant provider of certificates for secure on-line browsing, is trying to buy their main competitor Thawte. Verisign already has too much market power in this segment. The certificate industry is very susceptible to market domination. Barriers to entry are huge - you need to get your root certificates in nearly all deployed browsers, which can take years even if you get it in all newly shipping browsers. Verisign makes this clear in their own press release: http://www.verisign.com/press/1999/corporate/1220_thawte.html [Verisign and Thawte] are also the only two digital certificate providers with commercial availability of 128-bit website certificates, which enable highly strong encryption in both domestic and export versions of Microsoft and Netscape browsers. And also this threat to sew up the very standards by which this stuff is implemented: As a combined entity, VeriSign and Thawte will be able to implement a consistent set of global standards for the issuance and management of digital certificates for websites and software developers. VeriSign currently serves all of the Top 40 e-commerce sites and Fortune 500 companies with a web presence, and thousands of other sites with its range of Secure Site, Global Site and Code-Signing certificate services. Thawte has built a strong franchise through a widely distributed agent network in over 22 countries around the world. Together, the companies have over 3300 ISPs, ASPs and Web Hosting companies acting as resellers of their services. Thawte is the only important competitor to Verisign. They have a number of innovative practices which may be threatening to Verisign, obviously including their much lower prices. Read the many other comments at http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=99/12/20/1431223&&threshold=2 Please help prevent this merger. It hurts web site operators, e-commerce, privacy, and consumers. We need more competition in this space, not less!
The Clayton Act prohibits mergers or acquisitions that are likely to lessen competition. Under the Act, the government challenges those mergers that a careful economic analysis shows are likely to increase prices to consumers. All persons considering a merger or acquisition above a certain size must notify both the Antitrust Division and the Federal Trade Commission. The Act also prohibits certain other business practices that under certain circumstances may harm competition.
A provision in the Clayton Act permits private parties injured by an antitrust violation to sue in federal court for three times their actual damages plus court costs and attorneys' fees. State attorneys general may bring civil suits under the Clayton Act on behalf of injured consumers in their states, and groups of consumers often bring suits on their own.
Most states also have antitrust laws closely parallelling the federal antitrust laws. The state laws generally apply to violations that occur wholly in one state. These state laws are enforced similarly to federal laws through the offices of state attorneys general.
Effective antitrust enforcement requires public support. Public ignorance and apathy can weaken antitrust enforcement more than anything else. Whether you are a business person or a consumer, if you encounter business behavior that seems to violate the antitrust laws, do not hesitate to inform the enforcement agencies of your suspicions
Send complaints to newcase.atr@usdoj.gov as suggested at US Department of Justice - how to complain about antitrust violations
Lawyers for Entrust Technologies applied for a temporary restraining order against the deal at a Virginia court in early January, but this was turned down by the judge.