Skip Navigation



Journal of Competition Law and Economics Advance Access published online on May 8, 2008

Journal of Competition Law and Economics, doi:10.1093/joclec/nhn016
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Spulber, D. F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

© The Author (2008). Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournals.org

UNLOCKING TECHNOLOGY: ANTITRUST AND INNOVATION

Daniel F. Spulber *

Technology lock-in advocates argue that governments should step in to coordinate technology adoption decisions. Due to the presence of network effects, advocates warn that consumers may fail to adopt the best technology, thus missing out on potential benefits. Even worse, consumers may split, adopting multiple technologies and thus missing out on the benefits of network effects. Due to coordination problems, consumers cannot mitigate the effects of bad technology choices and the economy becomes stuck with inferior innovations. This article demonstrates that consumer coordination solves the underlying network effects problem, thus eliminating technology lock-in. Network effects are confined at most to the information and communications technology and selected electronics industries, which have developed mechanisms for interconnection and interoperability. Firms have incentives to provide interconnection and interoperability when it is efficient to do so. Rapid technological innovation is apparent whereas technology lock-in is a rare phenomenon. Antitrust policy founded on technology lock-in arguments is misguided and is likely to damage incentives for innovation.


* Elinor Hobbs Distinguished Professor of International Business and Professor of Management Strategy, Kellogg School of Management, and Professor of Law (courtesy), Northwestern Law School, 606 Jacobs Center, 2001 Sheridan Road, Evanston, IL 60208-2013, USA. E-mail: jems{at}kellogg.northwestern.edu. Presented at the Searle Center on Law, Regulation and Economic Growth, Northwestern Law School, Research Roundtable on the Law and Economics of Innovation. For their helpful comments, I thank Henry Butler, F. Andrew Hansen, D. Bruce Johnsen, F. Scott Kieff, Lynne Kiesling, Peter Klein, Bruce Kobayashi, Stan Liebowitz, Geoffrey Manne, Stephen Margolis, Scott Masten, Francesco Parisi, Matthew Sag, Henry Smith, Jim Speta, Scott Stern, Christopher Yoo, and Martin Zelder. © Daniel F. Spulber, 2008.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer:
Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.