David Evans, Jan 30, 2015
Software platforms anchor vast global communities of users, application developers, device manufacturers, content providers, advertisers, and others. They drive innovation by enabling entrepreneurs, often anywhere in the world, to develop “applications” and to reach all the users of the platform, often anywhere in the world. These applications are sometimes the foundation of substantial businesses. The value of these software platforms, and their ability to support large communities, depend on the ability of the platform to promote positive externalities and reduce negative externalities. Software platforms usually impose rules and standards and often exclude participants that harm others in the community, and reward participants that benefit others in the community. Competition policy should presume that these governance systems, and the restrictions they place on platform participants—including their possible expulsion from the platform—are efficient and pro-competitive. Software platforms could, however, employ governance systems to foreclose competition. These restrictions, therefore, should not be lawful per se. Rather, courts and competition authorities should employ screens to protect pro-competitive restrictions and isolate anticompetitive ones. The application of these screens should be neutral to the licensing model chosen by the software platform creator. There is, in particular, no basis for imposing limitations that are, in effect, tougher on software platforms that use an open-source license model than on software platforms that use a proprietary license.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
CVS Health Explores Potential Breakup Amid Investor Pressure: Report
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
DirecTV Acquires Dish TV, Creating 20 Million-Subscriber Powerhouse
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea Fines Kakao Mobility $54.8 Million for Anti-Competitive Practices
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Google Offers Settlement in India’s Antitrust Case Regarding Smart TVs
Oct 3, 2024 by
CPI
Attorney Challenges NCAA’s $2.78 Billion Settlement in Landmark Antitrust Cases
Oct 3, 2024 by
nhoch@pymnts.com
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Refusal to Deal
Sep 27, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust’s Refusal-to-Deal Doctrine: The Emperor Has No Clothes
Sep 27, 2024 by
Erik Hovenkamp
Why All Antitrust Claims are Refusal to Deal Claims and What that Means for Policy
Sep 27, 2024 by
Ramsi Woodcock
The Aspen Misadventure
Sep 27, 2024 by
Roger Blair & Holly P. Stidham
Refusal to Deal in Antitrust Law: Evolving Jurisprudence and Business Justifications in the Align Technology Case
Sep 27, 2024 by
Timothy Hsieh