WHAT distinguishes Canada Post, and the U.S postal system, for instance, from Staples, Toys ‘R* Us, Rockefeller’s Standard Oil, and Microsoft?

The former companies are monopolies; the lauer are not Monopolies but have been so accused in accor- dance with antitrust legisla- tion. Canada Post is a monopoly because its mar- ket dominance is derived not from what it offers con- sumers, but from “an exclu- sive grant of govesument privilege.” As monopolies, Canada Post and the local gas and cleetric companies in the ULS., do not compete or engage in a voluntary exchange with consumers. Rather, they control the market by forcibly prohibit- ing others from entering it.

Extend this premise, and you arrive at the natural conclusion that in a free market. where voluntary exchange between consent- ing adults is the guiding peinciple in trade, there can

¢ No Monopoly other than that created by government. How is it then that Microsoft is being hounded for being a monopoly?

The politics of envy notwithstanding, this is made possible through legis- lation that frames as preda- tory the process whereby an innovator captures a large market share. This despite the fact that the only way to capture a large portion of the market is by dint of gov- ernment legistation, like

llana ercer

comment

Canada Pose does, or through offering good ser- vice for a very Jow price, as Microsoft does.

Let’s backtrack: Recall that as a competitive strate- gy, Microsoft had bundled its Internet Explorer with its Windows operating system. It did so for tree, and with the aim of usurping the competition. Microsoft then licensed its Operating system to PC manufacturers with the proviso that they take free of charge its Internet Explorer. Fully within its right, Microsoit asserted copyright to prevent any reconfiguration of its operat- ing system. Was anyone pro- hibited from loading Netscape’s Navigator or any other Intel-compatible oper- ating system on to their PCs? Of course not.

Could Microsoft have prevented PC makers from installiag competitive prod- ucts? Absolutely not. That Netscape lost revenue is evi- dence of nothing more than Microsoft's competitive edge and Netscape’s failure to offer the consumer a similar deal. Netscape then runs to tiberbureaucrat Joe Nein of the U.S. Justice Department for a reinedy.

Clearly Microsoft has

arrived at its considerable market share by offering the consumer more “total prod: uct” for the least cost. Let's imagine, however, that there was a way to eliminate com- petition ina tree market other than by government decree. Such an evil empire could restrict its sales with the intent of raising prices and doing some serious profiteering.

But had Microsoft charged a high price for the browser it tied gratis to its Windows operating system, its rivals would have been thrilled as they would be well positioned to take such a market by storm. By the

Red-Breasted Nuthatch Often seen walking head-first. down trees, probing the bark for insect eggs the upripht birds have overlooked. His call Cenk-enk) has been Likened to a fitle toy horn. Wilt nest in cavities or chickadee ze NEstbox,

1190 Marine Gu Pemberton) 988-2121

way, flexible antitrust law would have nabbed the company for predation under this contingency as well.

It seo happened Microsoft did the opposite: It gave away the browser. So Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson proceeded to throw the antitrust legal bones, to con- jure up its shameful ances- tral precedents, and to declare Microsoft a monop- oly. The other free market mischief Microsoft might have attempted so as to drive and keep out competi- tion would have been to drop its total product price even lower, But to be truly

Green Power |

Friday, April 21, 2000 ~ North Shore News - 7

for success

“predatory,” Microsoft would have to keep it there over time, eventually going bust. For the duration that it managed such a Kamikaze feat, its rock-bottom prices would be benefiting con- sumers, which goes to show that, government monopo- lies excepted, there is no such thing as a predatory

price.

Despite a 1998 court decision that magnanimous- ly upheld Microsoft’s right to ue the two products, coupling the browser to Windows, according to judge Jackson’s conclusions of law, was not only incon-

Sce Qutmoded page 9

ik a

‘ > ary Al services fully warranty

F 2 i OW, Lube & Fitter . i 21 pt. Safety check, 15 rnuimutes - FAST!

i “nw Includes up tc 5 litres of 1O0w30 Quakerstate

1262 Marine Drive 98O-9TiS

pers 8:00am-6.090pm, Sun. 9:00amn-5:00pm Expres Apnl 26/2000

¢ The Ultimate Vitamin Mea! Supplement

¢ Contains 78 phyto-nutrient rich ingredients with digestive enzymes and phytolipids

¢ Super Food!

wate akee te.

actrees ees Ci

PAU Ski & | ~ Snowboard

“New Swimwear & Summer Clothing ~ arriving daily from: . -e Quicksilver « Hurley © Rietveld + Billabong ° Oakley ° Rusty Roxy ® Toes on the Nose » Voicom

1625 Lonsdale Avenue, ‘North Vancouver —