Antitrust Rent-Seeking

by on May 4, 2006 · 6 comments

Intel has asked the judge to throw out AMD’s antitrust case against it. I find it hard to understand how a case like this is supposed to benefit anyone but antitrust lawyers. After all, the point of the law is to alter incentives so that people won’t do bad things. Yet that doesn’t seem to have happened in recent high-tech antitrust cases. Microsoft, for example, has adopted the strategy of ignoring the antitrust process entirely, and it’s worked pretty well for them. By the time all the appeals in its browser-tying case had been exhausted, the IE-Netscape battle was ancient history, and the courts had no appetite for aggressive punitive actions. Sure, it costs Microsoft some money in fines and legal fees, but that’s far preferable to neutering themselves by refusing to enter any new market where they might be branded monopolists. Likewise, the EU has levied some big fines against Microsoft, but they haven’t figured out any way to reverse Microsoft’s alllegedly anti-competitive behavior. Microsoft would likely be in much worse shape had they stayed out of the media player market out of fear of anti-trust prosecution.

This AMD-Intel dispute seems to have similar dynamics. The lawsuit concerns conduct by Intel that occurred in the first half of this decade, yet the trial won’t start until 2008 and likely won’t be resolved until a year or two later. Given how murky the law is concerning what is and isn’t legitimate conduct, the logical thing for Intel to do is to ignore the antitrust process completely. They should focus on competing in the marketplace and let the legal department do damage control after the fact.

Which calls into question what the point is in the first place. If companies are going to do what they would have done anyway, what are we getting for those millions of dollars in legal fees?

  • http://tieguy.org/blog/ Luis Villa

    So your conclusion from ‘the legal process is broken’ is…? We should just stop trying to prosecute altogether?

  • http://tieguy.org/blog/ Luis Villa

    So your conclusion from ‘the legal process is broken’ is…? We should just stop trying to prosecute altogether?

  • http://www.techliberation.com/ Tim

    Frankly, yes, at least in these sorts of fast-moving high-tech cases. There doesn’t appear to be any shortage of competition, and the market evolves to rapidly for the law to accomplish much of value.

  • http://www.techliberation.com/ Tim

    Frankly, yes, at least in these sorts of fast-moving high-tech cases. There doesn’t appear to be any shortage of competition, and the market evolves to rapidly for the law to accomplish much of value.

  • Kwabena Nkansah Simpeh

    I am not sure we get the thrust of the Anti trust suits.Many in the technology industry spending hugh budgets on technology research would want to see some protection for their work.I am not by this suggesting that we sit for the very few multi nationals to take over the industry.Whether there are antitrust laws or not these organisation will find ways of still becoming monopolists no matter how brief that may be.New technology developed will still remain the preserve of these so called monopolists.Infact who wouldn’t want to enjoy that even the politicians benifit from all these hulabalo, lets be candid in our deliberations.My position has not been a capitalist monopolist but rather healthy competition that stimulate growth and development for all.

  • Kwabena Nkansah Simpeh

    I am not sure we get the thrust of the Anti trust suits.Many in the technology industry spending hugh budgets on technology research would want to see some protection for their work.I am not by this suggesting that we sit for the very few multi nationals to take over the industry.Whether there are antitrust laws or not these organisation will find ways of still becoming monopolists no matter how brief that may be.New technology developed will still remain the preserve of these so called monopolists.Infact who wouldn’t want to enjoy that even the politicians benifit from all these hulabalo, lets be candid in our deliberations.My position has not been a capitalist monopolist but rather healthy competition that stimulate growth and development for all.

Previous post:

Next post: