"Happily for those who care about individual liberty, free enterprise, and private property rights, David Kopel is not afraid to ask everything you wanted to know about public policies toward business in the Digital Age." March 2001 Buy Kindle version |  |
According to attorney David B. Kopel, the antitrust lawsuit U.S. v. Microsoft Corporation and the history of antitrust enforcement reveal the inability of government to either identify or to act against companies that attempt to extract monopoly profits by predatory practices or using market power. Government regulators must often proceed slowly to allow political oversight of their actions, and such delays allow technology to sweep away products, create new competitors, and fundamentally alter competitive balances long before judgments are reached. The vagueness of antitrust law makes it particularly hazardous for the information technology industry, where aggressive competition, strategic partnerships, and cutting prices to achieve market share are standard business practices. Microsoft, Kopel argues, is being tried for using aggressive competitive tactics that are commonplace in the software industry and legal when used by companies that haven’t been “marked with the scarlet ‘M’ for monopoly.” Kopel reviews the origins of antitrust law, finding it was rooted in concern over falling prices due to technological advances and economies of scale, and not concern for consumers victimized by monopoly pricing. He sees a parallel in the Microsoft case, where prosecutors failed to establish any consumer harm or even to produce a single consumer “victim.” Kopel contends that Microsoft was targeted for antitrust prosecution because it refused to hire lobbyists and make political contributions to “buy protection.” Ambitious prosecutors and politicians have used obsolete antitrust laws to demonize the company. “Open-ended laws allowing unpopular people and industries to be prosecuted on vague and shifting grounds are an invitation to abuse, especially during periods of destabilizing change. Anti-trust statutes, like anti-witch statutes, are archaic relics of fear. Neither has a place in the digital era.” |
