Re: keyboard/mouse programming

Rod Pemberton <do_not_have@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in part:
Perhaps I'm understanding things differently. A small company
with 1/10 of the US's market share for their product can be
engaging in anti-competitive business practices. Are they
a monopolist? If a national corporation controls 5/10 of the
US's market share for their industry, then no...

Legally establishing a monopoly in the US is based on "market
power", usually practically interpreted as pricing power:
if the firm increases its' price arbitrarily, can it make it
stick or will competitors force prices back down?

So, I see a difference in declaring that a corporation is
engaging in anti-competitive behavior and being a monopolist.

There is. Some business practices are illegal for monopolists
while legal for others. Vertical & horizontal expansion,
product tying, exclusive deals, etc.

If found guilty of being a monopolist, the courts could order
them to terminate all business permanently and dismantle
their corporation.

Certainly not! At least not under US law. There are many
monoplies, and some are classified as "natural" monopolies
wherein the techology rather forces a monopoly. Or makes
competitive behaviour grossly uneconomic. Two rail lines
through a small town. Multiple wired telephone networks.

US law recognizes this and does not ban monopolies per se. It does,
however, restrict monopolies from behaving "badly", especially in
attempting to expand the monopoly. Only if the monopoly defies
these will it order punishments like break-up. Like jail, these
are stupid and wasteful but necessary in the face of non-compliance.

Under US law, Intel has a monopoly on x86 CPUs. (AMD might too!
more than one is allowed). There have been violations, but mostly
it behaves and there is no talk of breakup. MS has a monopoly
on PC operating systems. It frequently violates (and nearly so)
US competition law, so there is talk of break-up.


-- Robert

.

Relevant Pages

  • RE: [fw-wiz] Youll never get fired for recommending IBM - sorry - Microsoft
    ... Because Microsoft is not a monopoly. ... > monopoly in the desktop operating systems market. ... > has, in point of fact and law, violated section 2 of the Sherman ... Laws do not prevent monopolies. ...
    (Firewall-Wizards)
  • Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
    ... > market, on wich all of their other decisions were predicated, was arbitrary ... > and bizarre, and the law did not provide any notice of how the market would ... If OSes are monopolies, then they ...
    (comp.unix.programmer)
  • Re: Microsoft Hatred FAQ
    ... > market, on wich all of their other decisions were predicated, was arbitrary ... > and bizarre, and the law did not provide any notice of how the market would ... If OSes are monopolies, then they ...
    (comp.os.linux.misc)
  • Re: My Migrations
    ... particular model with "Windows, Linux, or BeOS" they lose a million ... If a competitor looks like gaining market share they simply buy them, ... MS wanted a share of the entertainment business, ... monopolies. ...
    (comp.lang.cobol)
  • Re: Fines ?
    ... It's always hard to make it in a market already dominated by big ... The USA would long ago have done what the EU is doing if Microsoft ... If the World Government should become totalitarian, what can be done about it when there is nobody outside to help? ... Capitalism has failed insofar as it hasn't produced a system for stabilising the free market and making monopolies inherently impossible. ...
    (uk.politics.misc)