The recent decision by the European Court of First Instance to uphold the fine and sanctions the European Commission imposed upon Microsoft in 2004 appears to have justified the Commission’s interventionist approach to competition policy. A five-year investigation of Intel may also end with severe penalties. But the EU should not rejoice at this seeming triumph over American “big business.” Instead, it should ponder if its policies actually make Europe hospitable for innovating enterprises.
Italy’s Minister for Trade and Europe, Emma Bonino, commenting upon the Microsoft ruling, observed that the very name Microsoft evokes “what the US is capable of doing.” To Bonino, if a company of comparable significance isn’t being born in Europe, it is because “we haven’t been able to set up a favorable climate for it to flourish.”
The European Commission’s approach to competition policy won’t move Europe toward that better climate. Indeed, high-tech companies like Microsoft and Intel are particularly unsuitable targets for antitrust policing, because regulators cannot possibly move at the speed of ‘Internet time.’
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
The Russian state’s ideological madness and reversion to warlordism have been abetted by a religious fundamentalism that openly celebrates death in the name of achieving a god-like status. As Vladimir Putin’s propagandists are telling Russians, “Life is overrated.”
traces the religious and intellectual roots of the Kremlin’s increasingly morbid war propaganda.
It is hard to reconcile the jubilant mood of many business leaders with the uncertainty caused by the war in Ukraine. While there are some positive signs of economic recovery, a sudden escalation could severely destabilize the global economy, cause a stock market crash, and accelerate deglobalization.
warns that the Ukraine war and economic fragmentation are still jeopardizing world growth prospects.
Log in/Register
Please log in or register to continue. Registration is free and requires only your email address.
The recent decision by the European Court of First Instance to uphold the fine and sanctions the European Commission imposed upon Microsoft in 2004 appears to have justified the Commission’s interventionist approach to competition policy. A five-year investigation of Intel may also end with severe penalties. But the EU should not rejoice at this seeming triumph over American “big business.” Instead, it should ponder if its policies actually make Europe hospitable for innovating enterprises.
Italy’s Minister for Trade and Europe, Emma Bonino, commenting upon the Microsoft ruling, observed that the very name Microsoft evokes “what the US is capable of doing.” To Bonino, if a company of comparable significance isn’t being born in Europe, it is because “we haven’t been able to set up a favorable climate for it to flourish.”
The European Commission’s approach to competition policy won’t move Europe toward that better climate. Indeed, high-tech companies like Microsoft and Intel are particularly unsuitable targets for antitrust policing, because regulators cannot possibly move at the speed of ‘Internet time.’
To continue reading, register now.
Subscribe now for unlimited access to everything PS has to offer.
Subscribe
As a registered user, you can enjoy more PS content every month – for free.
Register
Already have an account? Log in