Professor Bainbridge...on law, politics, religion, culture & food

Microsoft and Bundling

The critical defect in the US settlement with Microsoft and the critical thing the EU got right goes to the issue of bundling. Brad DeLong writes:

Remember the days when there was not one single dominant browser that came preinstalled on 95% of PCs sold? Back then there was ferocious competition in the browser market, as first a number of competitors and then Netscape and Microsoft worked furiously to upgrade their browsers and add new features to them. Most of these new features turned out to be idiotic. Some turned out to be very useful. Progress in making better browsers was rapid, because browser-makers wanted to make a better product and any new idea about what a browser should be was rapidly deployed to a large enough user base to make it worthwhile for web designers to try to use the new feature.

And now? There is no progress in browsers at all. Why should anyone (besides crazed open sourcies) write a new browser? Why should Microsoft spend any money improving its browser? The point of giving Internet Explorer away for free is to protect Windows's market, after all.

Yeah, I know some antitrust experts opine that bundling is good for consumers. And, yes, some of them don't even work for Microsoft. But I don't see it. Bundling of private goods is fundamentally anti-competitive and, accordingly, reduces innovation. (As an alert reader pointed out, bundling private and public goods can be beneficial because public goods tend to be underproduced. In this case, however, neither WMP nor Windows are public goods.) Prohibiting Microsoft from bundling, say, media players and search engines into the Windows operating system is critical to preserving competition and promoting innovation.

So Much for Freedom of Association

Letter to the Editors of the WSJ($) from former NYC Mayor Ed Koch:

I believe that some cities rejecting the Boy Scouts from city programs and facilities results from their having barred some boys from joining troops simply because of their sexual orientation. ... Acting out inappropriately whether by heterosexuals or homosexuals should be barred or punished, not orientation.

Mr. Mayor, meet the First Amendment:

Congress shall make no law ... abridging ... the right of the people peaceably to assemble ....

See generally David Bernstein's You Can't Say That!: The Growing Threat to Civil Liberties from Antidiscrimination Laws.

In Defense of Pasadena

Kieran Healy is bad mouthing Pasadena over at Crooked Timber. The commenters are even worse (proving once again that my policy against them is correct). In sharp contrast, Crescat Sententia's Amy Lamboley rises to defend Pasadena, opining that:

Welcome Tung Yin to Typepad

Tung Yin has a new home here on TypePad, in a highly appropriate color scheme. Kudos. I've updated my blogroll and favorites list appropriately, as should we all.

Tax refunds

Glenn Reynolds writes:

We got our tax refund recently - much larger than it would have been, thanks to the tax cuts and particularly the abolition of the marriage penalty - and while some of the money has gone to the college account, it has also funded some home improvements: a new gas grill (not as fancy as these luxury models advertised on Bill Hobbs' site but it has 6 burners!), new blinds for the upstairs, etc. The Insta-Wife remains quite enthusiastic about President Bush. I wonder if this effect is widespread?

He then quotes a bunch of emails from readers pleased with their refunds. As for us, we got a very nice 4-figure refund, which we then turned around and applied to our first quarter 2004 estimated tax payment. Not quite as satisfying as seeing that check come back from Uncle Sam, but my already blooming enthusiasm for President Bush likely will spike even higher when I write a much smaller than normal estimated tax payment check in a few weeks.

Air America

The NYT Magazine's puff piece on Al Franken includes a very telling line about Franken's forthcoming talk radio show on the new liberal Air America network:

Franken's co-host is Katherine Lanpher from Minnesota Public Radio.

Which suggests the obvious question: Why does the left need an AM radio network when they have taxpayer-subsidized NPR? (I realize NPR gets no direct federal funding as such, but they do get it indirectly via grants from CPB, NEA, NSF, and other government agencies.)

Volokh

My friend and colleague Eugene Volokh is the latest blogger to submit to 20 questions.

Reading list

• Carnival of the Capitalists is up, with lots of goodies.
• Steven Taylor's Toast-o-Meter review of the week's political developments is up too, with all its usual goodness.