Author(s)
David S. Evans, Albert L. Nichols and Richard Schmalensee
Source
Journal of Competition Law and Economics 2005 1(3)
Summary
The remedy in the Microsoft case helped consumers.
Policy Relevance
The remedy in the Microsoft case was a fair compromise between those who thought that Microsoft had hurt competition, and those who thought consumers had not been harmed.
Main Points
- The original case against Microsoft made claims somewhat different from those finally accepted by the Court of Appeals.
- Ultimately, the remedies approved by the court did address the violations the Court of Appeals found, and also went a little further.
- Those who thought that the courts were right in finding that Microsoft hurt competition should be satisified that the order will protect against further harm.
- The authors' view is that there was not enough evidence that Microsoft harmed consumers. But at least the order avoided the serious damage to consumers that would have resulted from breaking Microsoft up into different firms.
