Anti-trust hurts consumers

April 13th, 2008 · 2 Comments

Since Apple has been doing a great job lately at meeting consumer demands, regulators will start harassing them for the crime of giving consumers what they want. Apple’s competition will be happy to encourage them. The eMusic founder thinks the rumored Apple music subscription model won’t pass the anti-trust test in the EU if they bundle free access to its iTunes catalogue with every iPod music player it sells.

You know the idea is good when it scares your competition to death before you even release it. I hope the government lets Apple please its customers the best way it sees fit. Let the competition create something else to please the consumer rather than use government force to keep themselves in business.

Tags: Apple · Economics

2 responses so far ↓

1 Osama Salah // Apr 14, 2008 at 12:40 am

You could see it differently. Apple is not able to sustain its success in the mp3 gadget nor the online music business and is resorting to anticompetitive behavior by trying to maintain and extend its dominance by using or abusing its current monopolies. On the long run the consumer will have one source for music entertainment and it will be controlled by Apple. Without competition the consumer will be the looser. Innovation and entrepreneurship will be crippled. It’s not what the consumer wants it’s what Apple is willing to give for a price.

I’m not attached to my ipod nor to itunes, and I do not want to be forcefully bound to any of them. That’s one reason I do not buy DRM crippled music from Itunes (and the fact it’s not available in the country I live in anyway

Anti-trust laws are pro-competitive and they are good thing. Unless you happen to own Apple shares, then it’s a different issue.
2 Jon Robinson // Apr 14, 2008 at 6:57 am
Hi Osama, Thanks for the comment.
1. How is it “anti-competitive” for Apple to try to win customers away from competitors? My answer is it isn’t “anti-competitive” rather it is the essence of competition. Anti-trust laws are anti-competitive in that they try to curb this natural behavior to try and please the customer.
2. Apple can’t force consumers to buy their ipods and use their DRM music plan. Consumers are free to get their music anyway they want that is available on the market. Apple doesn’t have a monopoly. Not even close. Such a plan may back fire on Apple, but it is their choice. Anyway, I bet such a plan would just be an option, not a requirement.
3. Competition isn’t an end in itself. You don’t need to force competition to occur. It naturally occurs when individuals voluntarily exchange goods and services with each other. Then another party sees this and offers to do it better. If he can’t, he can find something else to do. If a regulator forces the winner to make it possible for the loser to do business, not only will the product likely be worse, but consumers lose out on the other products the loser could go and produce. Bastiat’s broken window all over again.

Jon’s Network

new tagline pending