This is a topic that goes back at least ten years but I have never really reached a conclusion on this. My trade is software and my interest in this area has been raised since I discovered some of the online resources expounding on the Austrian perspective.
If there are no barriers to entry into the software industry and Microsoft is not exempt from any trade restrictions, is there any valid case to be made against Microsoft on the grounds that it is a either a monopoly or the recipient of government privilege/protection?
Perhaps someone has done some research on this and has some Austrian/libertarian insights to share.
I think this is exactly what you're looking for:
http://fare.tunes.org/liberty/microsoft_monopoly.html
And here's some other views as well:
Microsoft in Wonderland
Microsoft Copyrights –> Patent Dominance
Break Up Microsoft?
The Message of the Microsoft Case
For more on Microsoft, try using the search function on the mises.org homepage. And of course, for IP and monopoly info, see:
Against Intellectual Monopoly
Against Intellectual Property
Antitrust: The Case for Repeal
monopoly
Wow, thanks... that should keep me busy for a while ;-)
jimaustri123: If there are no barriers to entry into the software industry and Microsoft is not exempt from any trade restrictions, is there any valid case to be made against Microsoft on the grounds that it is a either a monopoly or the recipient of government privilege/protection?
There are two types of "monopolies" bandied up into a single bundle here. If a libertarian doesn't consider information as property (i.e. they are anti-IP) then their case against Microsoft is a case against all producers of information (code) which claim ownership to their product ("monopoly" of type 1) regardless of their market share, and has nothing to do with the fact that Microsoft's product in particular is most prevalent on the market ("monopoly" of type 2). Libertarian IP antagonists consider the "monopoly type 1" case to be valid while the "monopoly type 2" not valid. Libertarian IP proponents consider neither monopoly case to be valid. For them, the government's "monopoly" subsidy (protection) extended to information property owners is no different to the one extended to physical property owners.
Pro-IP libertarians argue with anti-IP ibertarians about "monopoly T1" which concerns all information property producers, and are in agreement about (non existent) "monopoly T2". It seems, a libertarian would not be singling out Microsoft in a "monopoly" accusation, regardless of the IP group (anti/pro) to which he belongs.
Bill Gates an honest entrepreneur? (critique of The Morality of Profit)
Monopoly and Competition (by Murray N. Rothbard)