The IBM and Microsoft Cases: What's the Difference?
作者作为两案的首席经济学证人，解释为何IBM案与微软案虽都涉及捆绑和杠杆指控，但事实不同，经济分析原则导致不同结论，微软的行为成功排除了竞争者。
The Microsoft case has attracted more attention than perhaps any antitrust case in history - far more than the mammoth IBM case of the 1970's, with which it is sometimes compared. I was the chief economics witness for IBM in U.S. v. IBM and the chief economics witness for the United States in U.S. v. Microsoft. I did not switch sides. Even though both cases involved bundling and charges of leveraging, the facts were different, and the principles of economic analysis led to different outcomes. In particular, Microsoft's actions did what IBM's could not have done -- excluded competitors by protecting an important barrier to entry into the market in which it held monopoly power.