CONCURRENCES No. 2-2017 (2017)
13 Pages Posted: 4 Mar 2017 Last revised: 30 Apr 2018
Date Written: March 3, 2017
In contrast to the European Commission, the U.S. Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have not meaningfully prosecuted monopolistic abuses over the past 16 years. The U.S. Supreme Court’s view on monopolies has also become forgiving. There is no empirical support that monopolies—whether in dynamic or static markets—are generally good for society.
Yes, one might say. But with the expansion of the data-driven economy, one has less to fear of monopolization. We debunk these myths in our book, Big Data and Competition Policy (Oxford University Press 2016). Our aim here is to summarize several reasons why data-driven markets can be monopolized, and identify one recent example of a data-driven exclusionary tactic. Thus, prosecuting monopolistic abuses is even more important in certain online industries.
Keywords: Monopoly, Antitrust, Big Data, Network Effects
JEL Classification: K21, L40, L41
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation