n the pro- cess BTC successfully defended its patents in courts over a period of some 20 years [1]. As it grew, BTC's cost advantage allowed it to outperform and acquire competitors one after another: eventually becoming almost the sole provider of telephony services in the United States. Telegraphy and telephony were nascent industries: BTC established an R&D entity, and equipment manufacturing subsidiaries to provide it with the necessary technologies and devices as well as leadership in the field. In particular, Bell Laboratories - the research arm of the company - was the place which attracted many of the brightest mathemati- cians and scientists of the day. These researchers discovered and formulated principles not only associated with telecommunications but also many other fields as diverse as astronomy and quantum physics. In time Bell Laboratories became a world leading research institute and home to seven Nobel Prize laureates as well many other prestigious award winners. By any measure BTC's technological endeavour was a great success. BTC's business dynamics were characterised by the high infrastructure roll-out cost, and network effects. It was soon realised that no market could afford to have more than one operator as it was inefficient to duplicate wiring, and difficult to connect circuits between two operators. This led to the establishment of monopoly operators in different geographic regions, who were then acquired one after another by BTC, resulting in a near-monopoly operation in North America. Indeed, a theory was developed by AT&T president Theodore Vail in 1907, that the telephone, 'by nature of its technology, would operate most efficiently as a monopoly providing universal service' [10]. This monopoly control of the market was in conflict with anti-trust laws of the United States, and therefore BTC had to negotiate with the US government to allow it to run a monopoly business despite existing strong anti-trust laws. Over the years several anti- trust suits were launched but BTC continued t