Re: Bundling and operating systems

["Lewis A. Mettler" <lmettler@lamlaw.com>]

Eric,

Eric Lee Green wrote:
> 
> On Sun, 19 Dec 1999, Lewis A. Mettler wrote:
> > Eric Lee Green wrote:
> > > On Sat, 18 Dec 1999, you wrote:
> > > > Sorry.  Harm is measured by the individual consumer not averaged.
> > >
> > > I think this is the essential difference between law and economics. Economics
> > > is concerned with the overall impact of actions. Law is concerned with the
> > > effects of actions upon one specific person.
> >
> > Incorrect.  See the findings of facts in regard to consumer harm.
> 
> I think there is no question that consumer harm has resulted from Microsoft's
> actions. However, I suggest that the appropriate focus is upon Microsoft's
> business practices, not Microsoft's product line. Microsoft's business
> practices constitute anti-competitive abuse of monopoly power. You're beating a
> dead horse.

Not a dead horse.  Microsoft's power comes from bundling.

That is why Bill Gates insists upon he right to bundle. He knows his
power is founded in bundling technology with the monopoly product.

Read that examination question.

Read the findings of facts.

Bundling always caused two affects:

1) price is increased to cover both products
2) choice is limited in both the short and long run.

I keep repeating the above because it is absolutely true and provides
the basis for Microsoft's ability to preclude competitors from its
markets.

Read the testimony from DOJ economists on this point.  Read the findings
of facts.

And, please distinguish, as I do, between suites of products also
offered separately and bundles which do not.

They are very different in their affect upon the market.

They are very different in their affect upon consumers.

When you refuse to distinguish, it appears that you only wish to retain
your ability to force the hand of consumers.


-- 
Lewis A. Mettler, Esq.(Attorney and Software Developer)
lmettler@LAMLaw.com
http://www.lamlaw.com/ (detailed review of the Microsoft antitrust
trial)