After the Facts: Decisions and Commentary

In this fresh examination of the Microsoft antitrust case, Richard Gordon critically examines the economics of the US government’s arguments. The conclusion is that the government presented a sketchy, incoherent, invalid economic case and relied upon creating the impression of misdeeds to persuade the courts. The primary charge is that Microsoft possessed an impregnable monopoly in operating systems for personal computers. According to the government, Microsoft created, included in its operating system, and vigorously promoted its internet browser solely to prevent the development of the Java/Netscape alternative. The promotion of this browser was considered predatory.