Antitrust and the Internet of Things: Addressing the Market-Tipping Fallacy
GAICIL Insights
Market tipping is often invoked to justify early intervention in connected-device markets. The article argues the notion confuses tipping with the first-mover advantage that comes with creating a market in the first place.
Without real tipping, or with considerable qualifications, the case for labeling IoT markets as gatekeeper markets weakens. The same argument applies to new AI markets, where early leadership is easily mistaken for entrenchment.
Abstract
The notion of market tipping in IoT confuses the first-mover advantage inherent to “market creation.” Absent market tipping, or with considerable qualifications, antitrust authorities should reconsider a hasty analysis concluding that IoT markets epitomize gatekeepers.1
Source of this summary: ITIF reprint page (link), not the journal.
Takeaway
“Absent market tipping, or with considerable qualifications, antitrust authorities should reconsider a hasty analysis concluding that IoT markets epitomize gatekeepers.”
Quoted verbatim from the author’s abstract.
Notes
- Aurelien Portuese, Antitrust and the Internet of Things: Addressing the Market-Tipping Fallacy, Concurrences No. 3-2021 (2021), https://itif.org/publications/2021/09/15/antitrust-and-internet-things-addressing-market-tipping-fallacy/. Abstract quoted verbatim from the ITIF reprint page (not the journal), https://itif.org/publications/2021/09/15/antitrust-and-internet-things-addressing-market-tipping-fallacy/. ↩
Cite as: Aurelien Portuese, Antitrust and the Internet of Things: Addressing the Market-Tipping Fallacy, Concurrences No. 3-2021 (2021), https://itif.org/publications/2021/09/15/antitrust-and-internet-things-addressing-market-tipping-fallacy/
Header image: Sonos PLAY 1 wireless speaker.jpg by Robert Wetzlmayr, CC BY-SA 4.0, via Wikimedia Commons.
