'Dynamic Competition' Does Not Excuse Monopolization
21 Pages Posted: 16 Oct 2008
Date Written: October 15, 2008
Abstract
This comment on a forthcoming article by Keith Hylton and David Evans explains why considerations of "dynamic competition" do not argue against antitrust enforcement. While the prospect of achieving monopoly may foster innovation, that observation misleads as to appropriate antitrust policy unless qualified by the observation that the push of competition generally spurs innovation more than the pull of monopoly. Moreover, the longstanding doctrinal rule that mere monopoly pricing is not illegal should not be read as demonstrating that antitrust law values monopolies for their role in promoting innovation.
Keywords: antitrust, innovation, monopolization
JEL Classification: K21, L4
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Antitrust Evaluation of Horizontal Mergers: An Economic Alternative to Market Definition
By Joseph Farrell and Carl Shapiro
-
The Effect of Mergers on Consumer Prices: Evidence from Five Selected Case Studies
-
Reinvigorating Horizontal Merger Enforcement
By Jonathan B. Baker and Carl Shapiro
-
Reinvigorating Horizontal Merger Enforcement
By Jonathan B. Baker and Carl Shapiro
-
The Need to Measure the Effect of Merger Policy and How to Do It
-
Why We Need to Measure the Effect of Merger Policy and How to Do it
-
Competition Policy with Optimally Differentiated Rules Instead of 'Per Se Rules vs. Rule of Reason'
-
Merger Simulation in Competition Policy: A Survey
By Oliver Budzinski and Isabel Ruhmer
-
Generating Evidence to Guide Merger Enforcement
By Orley Ashenfelter, Daniel S. Hosken, ...
-
Merger Retrospective Studies: A Review
By Graeme Hunter, Gregory K. Leonard, ...