Misconceptions, Misdirection and Mistakes
Published in DID MICROSOFT HARM CONSUMERS? TWO OPPOSING VIEWS, David S. Evans, Franklin M. Fisher, Daniel L. Rubinfeld and Richard L. Schmalensee, eds., AEI-Brookings Joint Center for Regulatory Studies, AEI Press, Washington, DC, 2000
Posted: 22 Apr 2001
Abstract
Fisher was the principal economic witness for the Antitrust Division in Microsoft. This paper is a rebuttal piece to a paper by David S. Evans and Richard L. Schmalensee, the latter of whom was the principal economic witness for Microsoft. The paper points out that Microsoft did, in fact, harm consumers but beyond that, such harm is not and should not be a requisite for a finding of liability in an antitrust case. The antitrust laws are designed to protect competition, and competition is presumed to protect consumers.
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Daniel L. Rubinfeld
University of California at Berkeley - School of Law ( email )
215 Boalt Hall
Berkeley, CA 94720-7200
United States
(510) 642-1959 (Phone)
(510) 642-3767 (Fax)
Do you have a job opening that you would like to promote on SSRN?
