forum.jpg (4424 bytes)     "Inside  every small problem is a large problem struggling to get out."

Rules Forum Contributors [For contributors only]


Experimental Economics
General Equilibrium
Other Topics
Prisoners Dilemma
Zero Sum Games


Thread and Full Text View

Ask a question about: Napster
Respond to the question: EULAs?

08/25/2012 08:39 AM by name withheld;
[View full text and thread]

11/13/2000 09:33 AM by Walter;
That sounds interesting. You may want to elaborate on the idea and contact David Levine. Also, Benjamin Klein is an expert in Microsoft issues (you can find his e-mail address in the UCLA Economics faculty contact list). [View full text and thread]

11/10/2000 11:07 AM by Ajay Chhheda; EULAs
An idea that I’ve been developing over the past few years is that instead of breaking up Microsoft, Judge Jackson could have allowed for this alternative: take away the core item that gave Microsoft its "monopolistic" power. The EULA. Instead of allowing the End User License Agreement (EULA) in perpetuity, put a cap on it. Make it some X years (I propose 2 years by following Moore’s law of 18 months and adding 6 months to it as a cushion) for the producer to re-coup their costs and make some profit, and then allow the purchaser to legally do whatever they wish to do with their purchase. The resolution adheres to the spirit of the anti-trust laws by allowing more competition, more innovation, and consumer protection while not penalizing corporations for being "too good" at what they do. Granted that IBM, AT&T, and Microsoft may have practices that could be construed as "predatory". On the other hand, there are practices (e.g. Intel) which "allow" some weak competitors to be in the market so the leading firm is not charged under the Sherman Anti-Trust Act. This practice is also not efficient. My impression is that "Why Napster is right" argument would align very closely with this view. Any comments? [Manage messages]