3 ms·

> The only real monopolies are those which are protected by government regulation or control. Not according to the law. Any one who basically controls the mark

> The only real monopolies are those which are protected by government regulation or control. Not according to the law. Any one who basically controls the market is a monopoly. Microsoft faced antitrust charges before as well and they were not protected by government regulation or control either. Monopoly itself is not a crime, though. Abusing the power of monopoly is, which is something the European Union has to prove.

brc 12y ago
Controlling the market would mean excluding competitors and capturing all the profits. Microsoft is a poor example of a monopoly as any long term shareholder will tell you, because they have little power in the market, a scant ten years or so after they peaked in market share. That is an extremely lame monopoly if it is one. All businesses are subject to market forces and cannot sustain a monopoly, Microsoft and Google included. Neither really meet the definition of a monopoly, which is generally the exclusion of all competition in a market. A real monopoly is something like control over a city transportation network, something like taxi licensing. Which can only happen through government control.
- netheril96 12y ago
  > All businesses are subject to market forces and cannot sustain a monopoly This is a very old view of free market, and perhaps only the proponents of classic economics can agree with you. Market forces have a natural tendency for monopoly, which is why monopoly laws are needed in the first place. For example, oil companies and ISPs are all monopolies naturally formed. Now, the IT companies may be different. As you say, the technology in this area advances so rapidly that a monopoly at one time soon becomes irrelevant at another time. Still a monopoly Microsoft is in the area of desktop operating system, but the power of such monopoly has faded away. But I don't think the European regulators would take this into account.

brc 12y ago

Controlling the market would mean excluding competitors and capturing all the profits. Microsoft is a poor example of a monopoly as any long term shareholder will tell you, because they have little power in the market, a scant ten years or so after they peaked in market share. That is an extremely lame monopoly if it is one. All businesses are subject to market forces and cannot sustain a monopoly, Microsoft and Google included. Neither really meet the definition of a monopoly, which is generally the exclusion of all competition in a market. A real monopoly is something like control over a city transportation network, something like taxi licensing. Which can only happen through government control.

netheril96 12y ago
> All businesses are subject to market forces and cannot sustain a monopoly This is a very old view of free market, and perhaps only the proponents of classic economics can agree with you. Market forces have a natural tendency for monopoly, which is why monopoly laws are needed in the first place. For example, oil companies and ISPs are all monopolies naturally formed. Now, the IT companies may be different. As you say, the technology in this area advances so rapidly that a monopoly at one time soon becomes irrelevant at another time. Still a monopoly Microsoft is in the area of desktop operating system, but the power of such monopoly has faded away. But I don't think the European regulators would take this into account.