Recent economic growth has been led by high-technology industries (See Jorgenson, Ho & Stiroh (2005) for a summary of the research on the recent acceleration of productivity growth). Many firms in these industries have achieved a dominant market position, thereby attracting the attention of competition authorities, often resulting in major monopolization cases. Unfortunately, this attention has not resulted in improved market outcomes. In this paper, we evaluate the effect of Section 2 Sherman Act cases brought against IBM, AT&T, and Microsoft. We conclude that these cases had limited effect on consumer welfare because they did not stimulate entry or innovation. In these industries, competition authorities cannot expect to promote simply an expansion of output and lower commodity prices; rather they should focus their remedies on promoting innovation—new products that replace or compete with the dominant firm’s products.
This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution.
Buy single article
Instant access to the full article PDF.
Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.
Anderson R., Moore T. (2006) The economics of information security. Science 314(5799): 610–613. doi:10.1126/science.1130992
Antitrust Modernization Commission. (2007). Report and recommendations, Washington, DC.
Bresnahan T. F., Greenstein S. (1999) Technological competition and the structure of the computer industry. Journal of Industrial Economics 47: 1–40
Carlton, D. W. (2007a). Does antitrust need to be modernized? US Department of Justice, Economic Analysis Group, Working paper EAG-07-3, January.
Carlton D. W. (2007b) Does antitrust need to be modernized?. Journal of Economic Perspectives 21(3): 151–176
Crandall R. W. (1991) After the breakup: Telecommunications in a more competitive era. Brookings, Washington, DC
Crandall, R. W. (2001). The failure of structural remedies in Sherman Act monopolization cases. Oregon Law Review, Spring, 109–198
Crandall R. W. (2005) The remedy for the ‘bottleneck monopoly’ in telecom: Isolate it, share it, or ignore it?. University of Chicago Law Review 72(1): 3–25
Crandall R. W., Elzinga K. G. (2004) Injunctive relief in Sherman Act monopolization cases. Research in Law and Economics 21: 277–284
Crandall, R. W., Flamm, K. (eds) (1989) Changing the rules: Technological change, international competition, and regulation in communications. Brookings Institution Press, Washington, DC
Crandall, R. W., & Winston, C. (2003). Does antitrust policy improve consumer welfare? Assessing the evidence. Journal of Economic Perspectives, Fall, 3–26.
Easterbrook F. H. (1984) The limits of antitrust. Texas Law Review 63(1): 1–40
Epstein R. A. (2007) Antitrust consent decrees in theory and practice. American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC
Fisher F.M., McGowan J.J., Greenwood J.E. (1983) Folded, spindled, and mutilated. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Fisher F. M., Rubinfeld D. L. (2000) United States v. Microsoft: An economic analysis. In: Evans D. S., Fisher F. M., Rubinfeld D. L., Schmalensee R. L. (eds) Did Microsoft harm consumers? Two opposing views. American Enterprise Institute, Washington, DC
Hausman J. (2003) Sources of bias and solutions to bias in the consumer price index. Journal of Economic Perspectives 17(1): 23–44
Jorgenson D. W., Ho M. S., Stiroh K. J. (2005) Productivity, volume 3: Information technology and the American growth resurgence. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Kellogg M. K., Thorne J., Huber P. W. (1992) Federal telecommunications law. Little Brown & Company, Boston
Kovacic W. E. (1999) Designing antitrust remedies for dominant firm misconduct. Connecticut Law Review 31(Summer): 1285–1319
Mazzucato M. (2002) The PC industry: New economy or early life-cycle?. Review of Economic Dynamics 5(2): 318–345
Sutton J. (1991) Sunk costs and market structure. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA
Temin P., Galambos L. (1987) The fall of the bell system. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge
U.S. Department of Justice. (2008). Competition and monopoly: Single firm conduct under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, September.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Crandall, R.W., Jackson, C.L. Antitrust in High-Tech Industries. Rev Ind Organ 38, 319–362 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11151-011-9298-4