IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/aea/jecper/v15y2001i2p45-62.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Microsoft Case: What Can a Dominant Firm Do to Defend Its Market Position?

Author

Listed:
  • Benjamin Klein

Abstract

This paper examines the competitive actions taken by Microsoft in its "browser war" with Netscape, most importantly Microsoft's decisions to give away Explorer free of charge, integrate Explorer into its dominant Windows operating system and pay online service providers for exclusive distribution. Consumers benefited significantly from these actions, but the fundamental economic question is whether Microsoft abused its existing market power when competing in this way. A detailed analysis of Microsoft's conduct and the economics of competition for distribution suggests that severe limits placed on Microsoft's behavior would not be welfare.

Suggested Citation

  • Benjamin Klein, 2001. "The Microsoft Case: What Can a Dominant Firm Do to Defend Its Market Position?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 45-62, Spring.
    • Handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:15:y:2001:i:2:p:45-62
    Note: DOI: 10.1257/jep.15.2.45
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.aeaweb.org/articles.php?doi=10.1257/jep.15.2.45
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Whinston, Michael D, 1990. "Tying, Foreclosure, and Exclusion," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 80(4), pages 837-859, September.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Kuroda, Toshifumi & Koguchi, Teppei & Ida, Takanori, 2019. "Identifying the effect of mobile operating systems on the mobile services market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 86-95.
    2. Esther Gal-Or & Qiaoni Shi, 2022. "Designing Entry Strategies for Subscription Platforms," Management Science, INFORMS, vol. 68(10), pages 7597-7613, October.
    3. Török, Ádám, 2011. "A dominanciaproblémák tényeinek értelmezése és a közgazdaság-tudományi módszertan [Interpretation of the facts of dominance problems and the methodology of economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 41-55.
    4. Hoppe, Heidrun C. & Lee, In Ho, 2003. "Entry deterrence and innovation in durable-goods monopoly," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 47(6), pages 1011-1036, December.
    5. Jonathan B. Baker, 2003. "The Case for Antitrust Enforcement," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 17(4), pages 27-50, Fall.
    6. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, May.
    7. Lamoreaux, N., 2019. "The Problem of Bigness: From Standard Oil to Google," Cambridge Working Papers in Economics 1963, Faculty of Economics, University of Cambridge.
    8. Bryan Pon & Timo Seppälä & Martin Kenney, 2015. "One Ring to Unite Them All: Convergence, the Smartphone, and the Cloud," Journal of Industry, Competition and Trade, Springer, vol. 15(1), pages 21-33, March.
    9. Leonhard Dobusch & Elke Schüßler, 2013. "Theorizing path dependence: a review of positive feedback mechanisms in technology markets, regional clusters, and organizations," Industrial and Corporate Change, Oxford University Press and the Associazione ICC, vol. 22(3), pages 617-647, June.
    10. Pollock, Rufus, 2005. "The Control of Porting in Two-Sided Markets," MPRA Paper 5023, University Library of Munich, Germany, revised Jun 2007.
    11. Avdasheva, Svetlana (Авдашева, Светлана), 2016. "Vertical Restraints in B2B Contracts: The Impact of Competition and Competitiveness [Вертикальные Ограничения В B2b Договорах: Воздействие На Конкуренцию И Конкурентоспособность]," Working Papers 3053, Russian Presidential Academy of National Economy and Public Administration.
    12. Krishnamurthy, Sandeep, 2009. "CASE: Mozilla vs. Godzilla — The Launch of the Mozilla Firefox Browser," Journal of Interactive Marketing, Elsevier, vol. 23(3), pages 259-271.
    13. Joshua Wright, 2011. "Does Antitrust Enforcement in High Tech Markets Benefit Consumers? Stock Price Evidence from FTC v. Intel," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 38(4), pages 387-404, June.
    14. Pier Luigi Parcu, 2006. "European dominant position and american monopolization: a unifying approach from basic game theory," Banca Nazionale del Lavoro Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 59(237), pages 171-192.
    15. Hal R. Varian, 2001. "High-technology industries and market structure," Proceedings - Economic Policy Symposium - Jackson Hole, Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, pages 65-101.
    16. Zigic, Kresimir & Maçi, Ilir, 2011. "Competition policy and market leaders," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1042-1049, May.
    17. Pier Luigi Parcu, 2006. "European dominant position and american monopolization: a unifying approach from basic game theory," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 59(237), pages 171-192.
    18. Steven J. Davis & Jack MacCrisken & Kevin M. Murphy, 2001. "Economic Perspectives on Software Design: PC Operating Systems and Platforms," NBER Working Papers 8411, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Christian Genthon, 2007. "Can we measure Microsoft's market power ?," Post-Print halshs-00153837, HAL.
    20. Randal Heeb, 2003. "Randal Heeb Innovation and Vertical Integration in Complementary Markets," Journal of Economics & Management Strategy, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 12(3), pages 387-417, September.
    21. J.W.B. Bos & I. Chan & J. Kolari & J. Yuan, 2009. "A Fallacy of Division: The Failure of Market Concentration as a Measure of Competition in U.S. Banking," Working Papers 09-33, Utrecht School of Economics.
    22. Radke, Marc-Peter, 2001. "Law and economics of Microsoft vs. U.S. Department of Justice - New paradigm for antitrust in network markets or inefficient lock-in of antitrust policy?," Violette Reihe: Schriftenreihe des Promotionsschwerpunkts "Globalisierung und Beschäftigung" 16/2001, University of Hohenheim, Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg, Evangelisches Studienwerk.
    23. Pollock, Rufus, 2009. "The Control of Porting in Platform Markets," The Journal of Economic Asymmetries, Elsevier, vol. 6(2), pages 155-180.
    24. Ravi Mantena & Ramesh Sankaranarayanan & Siva Viswanathan, 2007. "“Exclusive Licensing in Complementary Network Industries”," Working Papers 07-04, NET Institute, revised Apr 2007.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Christoph Schlueter-Langdon, 2000. "Information Technology And The Vertical Organization Of Industry," Computing in Economics and Finance 2000 174, Society for Computational Economics.
    2. Marie-Noëlle Calès & Laurent Granier & Nadège Marchand, 2012. "Competition between Clearing Houses on the European Market," Post-Print halshs-00959121, HAL.
    3. Vaubourg, Anne-Gael, 2006. "Differentiation and discrimination in a duopoly with two bundles," International Journal of Industrial Organization, Elsevier, vol. 24(4), pages 753-762, July.
    4. Jeon, Doh-Shin & Menicucci, Domenico, 2009. "Bundling and Competition for Slots: On the Portfolio Effects of Bundling," IDEI Working Papers 574, Institut d'Économie Industrielle (IDEI), Toulouse, revised Jul 2011.
    5. Crawford, Gregory, 2013. "Cable Regulation in the Internet Era," CEPR Discussion Papers 9316, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Oliver Budzinski & Katharina Wacker, 2007. "The Prohibition Of The Proposed Springer-Prosiebensat.1 Merger: How Much Economics In German Merger Control?," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 3(2), pages 281-306.
    7. Sébastien Galanti & Anne-Gaël Vaubourg, 2020. "Unbundling financial services: The case of brokerage and investment research," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 40(1), pages 473-484.
    8. Joseph Farrell & Michael L. Katz, 2000. "Innovation, Rent Extraction, and Integration in Systems Markets," Journal of Industrial Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 48(4), pages 413-432, December.
    9. Jihui Chen & Qiang Fu, 2017. "Do exclusivity arrangements harm consumers?," Journal of Regulatory Economics, Springer, vol. 51(3), pages 311-339, June.
    10. Qing Hu & Tomomichi Mizuno, 2021. "Positive Effects of Bundling on Rival's Profit and Social Welfare in a Vertical Relationship," Economics Bulletin, AccessEcon, vol. 41(1), pages 85-92.
    11. Fontagné, Lionel & Secchi, Angelo & Tomasi, Chiara, 2018. "Exporters’ product vectors across markets," European Economic Review, Elsevier, vol. 110(C), pages 150-180.
    12. Koning, Kendall J. & Yankelevich, Aleksandr, 2018. "From internet “Openness” to “Freedom”: How far has the net neutrality pendulum swung?," Utilities Policy, Elsevier, vol. 54(C), pages 37-45.
    13. Marinoso, Begona Garcia, 2001. "Marketing an upgrade to a system: compatibility choice as a price discrimination device," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 13(4), pages 377-392, December.
    14. Stole, Lars A., 2007. "Price Discrimination and Competition," Handbook of Industrial Organization, in: Mark Armstrong & Robert Porter (ed.), Handbook of Industrial Organization, edition 1, volume 3, chapter 34, pages 2221-2299, Elsevier.
    15. Alexei Alexandrov & Özlem Bedre-Defolie, 2014. "The Equivalence of Bundling and Advance Sales," Marketing Science, INFORMS, vol. 33(2), pages 259-272, March.
    16. Thibaud Verge, 2002. "Portfolio Analysis in European Merger Control: An Economic Analysis," The Centre for Market and Public Organisation 02/046, The Centre for Market and Public Organisation, University of Bristol, UK.
    17. Layne-Farrar, Anne & Salinger, Michael A., 2016. "Bundling of RAND-committed patents," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 45(6), pages 1155-1164.
    18. Arribas, I. & Urbano, A., 2017. "Multiproduct trading with a common agent under complete information: Existence and characterization of Nash equilibrium," Journal of Economic Theory, Elsevier, vol. 167(C), pages 14-38.
    19. 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.
    20. Zhiyong Liu & Yue Qiao, 2012. "Abuse of Market Dominance Under China’s 2007 Anti-monopoly Law: A Preliminary Assessment," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 41(1), pages 77-107, August.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L86 - Industrial Organization - - Industry Studies: Services - - - Information and Internet Services; Computer Software
    • L51 - Industrial Organization - - Regulation and Industrial Policy - - - Economics of Regulation
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:aea:jecper:v:15:y:2001:i:2:p:45-62. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Michael P. Albert (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://edirc.repec.org/data/aeaaaea.html .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.