Microsoft and Intel V. Antitrust Law
Microsoft and Intel V. Antitrust Law
By
Name
William Cheng
Economics
7/26/2014
The article I found to be interesting focuses on the U.S. court cases United States v. Microsoft and In re Intel Corp. Both of which, are dealing with violations of antitrust law. The topics include the preservation of innovation, the application of antitrust standards to high-technology platforms, and market monopolization.
In the early 90’s Microsoft and Intel were investigated and later charged with a substantial violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. “The antitrust laws proscribe unlawful mergers and business practices in general terms, leaving courts to decide which ones are illegal based on the facts of each case.” Microsoft and Intel were creating as it would seem a perfect partnership, and an even better Monopoly. Microsoft used anti-competitive practices to keep its leading edge on the market. Microsoft and Intel were closely related in fact and law. Of course, Microsoft denied any allegations and sought to defend its business practices and reputation.
There are many different opinions on the subject. Some have argued that antitrust should have little or no role in high-technology platform markets due to the rate of innovation makes antitrust intervention unnecessary. Others argue, however, that the presence of network effects can make the consequences of the anticompetitive conduct more durable by giving the platform leader a dominant position. “The D.C. Circuit in Microsoft suggested that "The economic consequences of network effects and technological dynamism act to offset one another, thereby making it difficult to formulate categorical antitrust rules absent a particularized analysis of a given market”
An evaluation of the case findings and Microsoft’s defense led me to agree with the Court. The first step in reaching this opinion was to determine if Microsoft is in fact a monopoly. Monopolization is proven by two elements. One is that the company “possesses
By
Name
William Cheng
Economics
7/26/2014
The article I found to be interesting focuses on the U.S. court cases United States v. Microsoft and In re Intel Corp. Both of which, are dealing with violations of antitrust law. The topics include the preservation of innovation, the application of antitrust standards to high-technology platforms, and market monopolization.
In the early 90’s Microsoft and Intel were investigated and later charged with a substantial violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. “The antitrust laws proscribe unlawful mergers and business practices in general terms, leaving courts to decide which ones are illegal based on the facts of each case.” Microsoft and Intel were creating as it would seem a perfect partnership, and an even better Monopoly. Microsoft used anti-competitive practices to keep its leading edge on the market. Microsoft and Intel were closely related in fact and law. Of course, Microsoft denied any allegations and sought to defend its business practices and reputation.
There are many different opinions on the subject. Some have argued that antitrust should have little or no role in high-technology platform markets due to the rate of innovation makes antitrust intervention unnecessary. Others argue, however, that the presence of network effects can make the consequences of the anticompetitive conduct more durable by giving the platform leader a dominant position. “The D.C. Circuit in Microsoft suggested that "The economic consequences of network effects and technological dynamism act to offset one another, thereby making it difficult to formulate categorical antitrust rules absent a particularized analysis of a given market”
An evaluation of the case findings and Microsoft’s defense led me to agree with the Court. The first step in reaching this opinion was to determine if Microsoft is in fact a monopoly. Monopolization is proven by two elements. One is that the company “possesses
References: Dallas, C. (2000, October 17). Economics. The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly -. Retrieved July 27, 2014, from http://www.netplaces.com/economics/imperfectly-competitive-markets/the-good-the-bad-and-the-ugly.htm William, P. Antitrust, Innovation. Antitrust Law Journal, Vol. 78, p363-395. 33p. University of Louisville Law Review. Fall2013, Vol. 52 Issue 1, p67-103. 37p.