Re: Offtopic, inappropriate jokes?

["Frank BENNETT (=?iso-2022-jp?B?GyRCJVUlaSVzJS8hISVZJU0lQyVIGyhC?= )" <bennett@example.com>]

On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 11:03:22AM +0100, Simon Cozens wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 09, 2001 at 12:02:43PM +0900, Frank BENNETT (フランク　ベネット ) wrote:
> > Now suppose that Marie Callendar's has the good luck one day to see
> > all the other sweets peddlers wiped out (because some sympathetic
> > legislator makes their operations illegal, say, or because it suddenly
> > and inexplicably becomes physically dangerous to compete in this line
> > of business).
>  
> So anti-trust laws are to protect against clueless legislators?

Unfortunately, antitrust law is just another statute; if the government
decides it __wants__ to reinforce a monopoly or call one into being, the deed
is done.

> > They could cut corners in other ways instead -- by substituting raw
> > cane sugar for pies, or by closing a bunch of their stores, or by
> > taking less care to keep insects and bits of dirt out of their pie
> > fillings. But the idea is that they don't have to work so hard to do
> > just as well for themselves as they did before.
> 
> But there's got to be a point at which it becomes feasible for someone
> to start a new pie franchise undercutting them.

Normally, yes.  That's why I hypothesized a law against entry or the
systematic kneecapping of competitors in my silly example: there have to be
high barriers to entry for monopolistic profiteering to work.

> In the case of software,
> this happens when the non-existant Linux, Inc. produces an equivalent or
> better product for $0. Then those who want cheap pie or OS can have it;
> moreover, the monopoly would have created the demand for cheap pies, so
> it's natural for someone to come along and fill it. It doesn't seem right
> to start with free market capitalism, but follow it up with 'so long as
> you don't do too well.' I suppose there are areas where it is impossible to
> compete, such as the case of the phone company who owns all the cable (ooh,
> look, threads merging) but those cases are usually state-sponsored monopolies
> in the first case.

Markets with strong network effects (like the phone company) are infused with
a policy tension; you want a single network, but you don't want its owner (or
the state) gouging everyone at the gate.  Where I have a real problem with
Microsoft's expansion efforts is in the market for standards, as in their
conflict with Sun over Java.  Proprietized standards are like selling justice
to the highest bidder; it kind of works, but it is excessively costly to
society.

There are a couple of links below the heading "Protocol design and IP rights"
on the following page that you might find interesting:

  http://www.nomolog.nagoya-u.ac.jp/~bennett/zemi/index.html

Cheers,
Frank Bennett