Chillin'Competition

Relaxing whilst doing Competition Law is not an Oxymoron

Google, Microsoft, Skype, et cætera

with one comment

Confessing a lack of inspiration tonight, I paste hereafter a link to an interesting NYTimes paper on the ongoing Commission investigation against Google. Thanks to James Kanter for the opportunity to be interviewed.

The topic of this paper also gives me a nice pretext to remind our readers that the merger clearance decision in Microsoft/Skype was published a month ago. This decision is well worth reading. It makes a bunch of interesting points on several counts. Here’s a taste of them. First, the decision clearly shows that a merger involving a large monopoly can get Phase I clearance.

Second, it suggests that the tide has turned in so far as the Commission’s appraisal of ICT markets is concerned. On several occasions, the decision unambiguously depicts Microsoft as a vacillating player, in a sector (communications services) where the Facebook, Google and Apple of this world are poised to become – or are already – the market leaders.

Third, the §§ on the tying of Skype with Windows OS are not wholly consistent with the 2004 and 2009 decisions, where pre-installation was deemed problematic in itself, because of the lack of subsequent (switching) user behavior. Remember, those decisions relied on this theory that lazy users were often stuck with WMP and IE, for behavioral biases (the so-called “end-users’ inertia” at §870 of the 2004 decision). Here, the Commission stresses that pre-installation is unproblematic at any rate because consumers do not use whatever communication service found on Windows + there are many alternative means for rivals to reach out to consumers + Skype is already pre-installed on >50% of Windows PCs, but only a small share of Skype are registered and connected users.

Finally, the decision contains some nice wording on the flaws of standard antitrust analysis in dynamic markets. See for instance, §78, which calls for caution in applying conventional market share analysis to such sectors: “consumer communications services are a nascent and dynamic sector and market  shares can change quickly within a short  period of time. Furthermore, almost all communications services are offered free of charge”. See also §122: “Consumers are very sensitive  to innovative services or products in consumer communications services. Providers of consumer communications services lose traction quickly if they are unable to offer users new and innovative functionality”.

Written by Nicolas Petit

6 December 2011 at 11:57 pm

Posted in Case-Law

One Response

Subscribe to comments with RSS.

  1. Regarding the apparent change of position, it is not pointless the paragraph 20 of the Decision. Literally, I am reading: “The Commission, which is required by the present decision to assess Internet consumer communications services for the first time”.

    Antonio

    7 December 2011 at 2:17 pm


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: