An Economist's Guide to U.S. v. Microsoft
AbstractWe analyze the central economic issues raised by U.S. v Microsoft. Network effects and economies of scale in applications programs created a barrier to entry for new operating system competitors, which the combination of Netscape Navigator and the Java programming language potentially could have lowered. Microsoft took actions to eliminate this threat to its operating system monopoly, and some of Microsoft's conduct very likely harmed consumers. While we recognize the risks of the government's proposed structural remedy of splitting Microsoft in two, we are pessimistic that a limited conduct remedy would be effective in this case.
Download InfoIf you experience problems downloading a file, check if you have the proper application to view it first. In case of further problems read the IDEAS help page. Note that these files are not on the IDEAS site. Please be patient as the files may be large.
Bibliographic InfoPaper provided by University of California at Berkeley in its series Economics Working Papers with number E01-300.
Date of creation: 01 May 2001
Date of revision:
Contact details of provider:
Postal: University of California at Berkeley, Berkeley, CA USA
Web page: http://www.haas.berkeley.edu/groups/iber/wps/econwp.html
More information through EDIRC
Postal: IBER, F502 Haas Building, University of California, Berkeley CA 94720-1922
Other versions of this item:
- Richard J. Gilbert & Michael L. Katz, 2001. "An Economist's Guide to U.S. v. Microsoft," Industrial Organization 0106001, EconWPA.
- Gilbert, Richard & Katz, Michael, 2001. "An Economist's Guide to U.S. v Microsoft," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt7kj1x7g9, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- Gilbert, Richard J & Katz, Michael, 2001. "An Economist's Guide to U.S. v. Microsoft," Department of Economics, Working Paper Series qt56f8p06q, Department of Economics, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
- L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
- K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
- L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices
- L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
This paper has been announced in the following NEP Reports:
- NEP-ALL-2001-11-05 (All new papers)
- NEP-ENT-2001-11-05 (Entrepreneurship)
- NEP-NET-2001-11-05 (Network Economics)
- NEP-TID-2001-11-05 (Technology & Industrial Dynamics)
Please report citation or reference errors to , or , if you are the registered author of the cited work, log in to your RePEc Author Service profile, click on "citations" and make appropriate adjustments.:
- Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 2002.
"The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries,"
RAND Journal of Economics,
The RAND Corporation, vol. 33(2), pages 194-220, Summer.
- Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 1998. "The Strategic Use of Tying to Preserve and Create Market Power in Evolving Industries," NBER Working Papers 6831, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Dennis W. Carlton & Michael Waldman, 1998. "The Strategic Use Of Tying To Preserve And Create Market Power In Evolving Industries," University of Chicago - George G. Stigler Center for Study of Economy and State 145, Chicago - Center for Study of Economy and State.
- Michael D. Whinston, 1989.
"Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion,"
NBER Working Papers
2995, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Reinganum, Jennifer F., 1989. "The timing of innovation: Research, development, and diffusion," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: R. Schmalensee & R. Willig (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 1, chapter 14, pages 849-908 Elsevier.
- Richard Gilbert, 2000. "Exclusive Dealing, Preferential Dealing, and Dynamic Efficiency," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer, vol. 16(2), pages 167-184, March.
- Michael L. Katz & Carl Shapiro, 1985. "On the Licensing of Innovations," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 16(4), pages 504-520, Winter.
- Salop, Steven C & Scheffman, David T, 1987. "Cost-Raising Strategies," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 36(1), pages 19-34, September.
- Charles I. Jones & John C. Williams, .
"Measuring the Social Return to R&D,"
97002, Stanford University, Department of Economics.
- Zvi Griliches, 1991.
"The Search for R&D Spillovers,"
NBER Working Papers
3768, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Griliches, Zvi, 1992. " The Search for R&D Spillovers," Scandinavian Journal of Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 94(0), pages S29-47, Supplemen.
- Zvi Griliches, 1998. "The Search for R&D Spillovers," NBER Chapters, in: R&D and Productivity: The Econometric Evidence, pages 251-268 National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
- Aghion, Philippe & Bolton, Patrick, 1987. "Contracts as a Barrier to Entry," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(3), pages 388-401, June.
This item has more than 25 citations. To prevent cluttering this page, these citations are listed on a separate page. reading list or among the top items on IDEAS.Access and download statisticsgeneral information about how to correct material in RePEc.
For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Christopher F. Baum).
If references are entirely missing, you can add them using this form.