Subject: Re: ARM: The Non-Evil Monopolist
From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@xemacs.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:45:59 +0900

>>>>> "Lawrence" == Lawrence Rosen <lrosen@rosenlaw.com> writes:

    Lawrence> Monopoly is not "intrinsically bad" if only because many
    Lawrence> forms of it are government sanctioned (i.e., copyright,
    Lawrence> patent). Antitrust law focuses

We have the cart pulling the horse here.

The notion that "monopolization, not monopoly, is the problem" is a
legal heuristic, not an expression of intrinsic values.  I'm +1 on the
argument that it's a very useful heuristic, and that stability of the
legal environment, including the reasoning used to create and modify
laws, is a value that we should avoid injuring.

But there _are_ intrinsic bads associated with monopoly, and current
antitrust and intellectual property law is, as far as I know, an attempt
to balance reduction of bads due to monopoly with reduction of bads
due to side effects of production distributed among several firms.
Aka "two wrongs make a workable compromise."  It's not an expression
of the intrinsic ethical or economic neutrality of monopoly.

-- 
Institute of Policy and Planning Sciences     http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp
University of Tsukuba                    Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN
               Ask not how you can "do" free software business;
              ask what your business can "do for" free software.