Skip to main content
×
×
Home

The costs of free: commoditization, bundling and concentration

  • JONATHAN M. BARNETT (a1)
Abstract

Digital markets offer abundant free content but exhibit extreme concentration among content aggregation intermediaries. These characteristics are linked. Weak copyright environments select against stand-alone content-delivery structures and select for bundled aggregation structures in which free content for users promotes positively priced advertising and data-collection services for firms. Dominant intermediaries promote commoditization, and the reallocation of market rents from content producers to content aggregators, through litigation and free content distribution that weaken copyright protections. The potential net welfare effects raise concern. Network effects, compounded by weak inventory constraints, scale economies, and learning effects, promote winner-takes-all outcomes in the intermediary services market while weak copyright may generate output distortions in the content production market.

Copyright
Corresponding author
References
Hide All
Barnett, J. M. (2011), “The Host's Dilemma: Strategic Forfeiture in Platform Markets for Informational Goods,” Harvard Law Review, 124 (8): 1861–938.
Barnett, J. M. (2013), “Copyright without Creators,” Review of Law & Economics, 9 (3): 389438.
Barnett, J.M. (2014), “From Patent Thickets to Patent Networks: The Legal Infrastructure of the Digital Economy,” Jurimetrics, 55 (1): 153.
Benkler, Y. (2006), The Wealth of Networks: How Social Production Transforms Markets and Freedom, New Haven: Yale University Press.
Boldrin, M. and Levine, D. K. (2008), Against Intellectual Monopoly, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Bracha, O. and Pasquale, F. A. (2008), “Federal Search Commission? Access, Fairness, and Accountability in the Law of Search,” Cornell Law Review, 93 (6): 1149–209.
Brandom, R. (2014), “The World's Largest Photo Service Just Made Its Pictures Free to Use,” The Verge, March 5.
Breyer, S. (1970), “The Uneasy Case for Copyright: A Study of Copyright in Books, Photocopies and Computer Programs,” Harvard Law Review, 84 (2): 281351.
CNET (1998), Netscape cuts prices on retail products, January 30, https://www.cnet.com/news/netscape-cuts-prices-on-retail-products/ (accessed January 4, 2018).
Complaint for Declaratory Relief and Injunctive Relief and Damages (2007), Viacom International Inc. et al. v. YouTube, Inc. et al., US District Court for the Southern District of New York, March 13.
comScore (2016a), comScore Releases January 2016 US Desktop Search Engine Rankings, March 16, https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Rankings/comScore-Releases-January-2016-US-Desktop-Search-Engine-Rankings (accessed November 30, 2016).
comScore (2016b), comScore Reports February 2016 US Smartphone Subscriber Market Share, April 6, https://www.comscore.com/Insights/Rankings/comScore-Reports-February-2016-US-Smartphone-Subscriber-Market-Share (accessed January 4, 2018).
Dave, P. (2017), “Google relaxes rules on free news stories, plans subscription tools,” Reuters, October 1.
Digital Media Licensing Association (2013), CEPIC submits EU antitrust complaint against Google Images, http://blog.digitalmedialicensing.org/?p=870 (accessed January 4, 2018).
Edelman, B. (2015), “Does Google Leverage Market Power Through Tying and Bundling?Journal of Competition Law and Economics, 11 (2): 365400.
Elberse, A. (2008), “Should You Invest in the Long Tail?” Harvard Business Review, July/August.
Ember, S. (2017), “Google Updates Policy on News Pay Walls. ‘First Click Free’ to End,” New York Times, October 2.
Engels, B. (2016), “Data portability among online platforms,” Internet Policy Review, 5 (2): 117.
Enterprise Linux Insights (2016), IT Trends: Strategies for Operational Efficiencies in the Era of Open Source, June 13, http://www.enterpriselinuxinsights.com/2016s-top-trends-strategies-address/ (accessed January 4, 2018).
European Commission (2016), Antitrust: Commission sends Statement of Objections to Google on Android operating system and applications, April 20.
Evans, D. S. (2008), “The Economics of the Online Advertising Industry,” Review of Network Economics, 7 (3): 359–91.
Evans, D. S. (2011), “The Antitrust Economics of Free,” Competition Policy International, 7 (1): 7189.
Evans, D. S. and Schmalansee, R. (2013), “The Antitrust Analysis of Multi-Sided Platform Businesses,” in Blair, R. D. and Sokol, D. D. (eds), Oxford Handbook on International Antitrust Economics, Oxford: Oxford University Press, pp. 404–47.
Fahrenthold, D. A. (2012), “SOPA protests shut down Web sites,” Washington Post, January 18.
Farrell, J. and Katz, M. L. (2000), “Innovation, Rent Extraction and Integration in Systems Markets,” Journal of Industrial Economics, 48 (4): 413–32.
Federal Trade Commission (2013), Statement Regarding Google's Search Practices In the Matter of Google, Inc., FTC File Number 111–0163, January 3.
Gal, M. S. and Rubinfeld, D. L. (2016), “The Hidden Costs of Free Goods: Implications for Antitrust Enforcement,” Antitrust Law Journal, 80 (3): 521–62.
Google (2017), Transparency Report Data, https://transparencyreport.google.com/copyright/overview (accessed January 4, 2018).
Gurley, B. (2009), “Google Redefines Disruption: ‘Less than Free’ Business Model,” Above the Crowd, October 29, http://abovethecrowd.com/2009/10/29/google-redefines-disruption-the-less-than-free-business-model/ (accessed January 4, 2018).
Haucap, J. and Stühmeier, T. (2017), “Competition and antitrust in Internet markets,” in Handbook on the Economics of the Internet (eds. Bauer, J. M. and Latzer, M.), Cheltenham, UK: Edward Elgar Publishing, pp. 183210.
Kallas, P. (2016), “Top 10 Social Networking Sites by Market Share of Visits,” Dreamgrow, December 4, https://www.dreamgrow.com/top-10-social-networking-sites-market-share-of-visits/ (accessed January 4, 2018).
Khan, Z. (2005), The Democratization of Invention: Patents and Copyrights in American Economic Development, 1790–1920, New York: Cambridge University Press.
Khan, Z. and Sokoloff, K. (2001), “The Early Development of Intellectual Property Institutions in the United States,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 15 (3): 233–46.
Klein, B. (1999), “Microsoft's Use of Zero Price Bundling to Fight the ‘Browser Wars’,” in: Eisenach, J. A. and Lenard, T. M. (eds), Competition, Innovation and the Microsoft Monopoly: Antitrust in the Digital Marketplace, Washington, DC: Kluwer Academic Publishers, pp. 216–53.
Lemley, M. (2010), “Is the Sky Falling on the Content Industries?Journal of Telecommunications and High Technology Law, 9 (1): 125–35.
Lemley, M. (2015), “IP in a World without Scarcity”, New York University Law Review, 90 (2): 460515.
Lerner, A. (2014), “The Role of ‘Big Data’ in Online Platform Competition,” Working Paper, http://awards.concurrences.com/IMG/pdf/big.pdf (accessed January 4, 2018).
Lessig, L. (2004), Free Culture: How Big Media Uses Technology and the Law to Lock Down Culture and Control Creativity, New York: Penguin Press.
Liebowitz, S. J. (2014), “How Much of the Decline in Sound Recording Sales is due to File-sharing?Journal of Cultural Economics, 40 (1): 1328.
Liebowitz, S. J. (2016), “Paradise Lost or Fantasy Island? Voluntary Payments by American Publishers to Authors Not Protected by Copyright,” Journal of Law and Economics, 59 (3): 549–67.
Liebowitz, S. J. and Margolis, S. E. (1994), “Network Externality: An Uncommon Tragedy,” Journal of Economic Perspectives, 8 (2): 133–50.
Linux Foundation (2009), Linux Kernel Development: How Fast It Is Going, Who is Doing It, What They Are Doing, and Who is Sponsoring It (ed. Kroah-Hartman, G.), https://www.linuxfoundation.org/publications/linux-kernel-development-how-fast-it-is-going-who-is-doing-it-what-they-are-doing-and-who-is-sponsoring-it-2010/ (accessed January 4, 2018).
Linux Foundation (2010), Linux Kernel Development: How Fast It Is Going, Who is Doing It, What They Are Doing, and Who is Sponsoring It (ed. Corbet, J.), https://www.linuxfoundation.org/resources/publications/page/3/.
Linux Foundation (2016), Linux Kernel Development: How Fast It Is Going, Who is Doing It, What They Are Doing, and Who is Sponsoring It (ed. Kroah-Hartman, G.), https://www.linuxfoundation.org/resources/publications/.
Lunney, G. (2014), “Copyright's Mercantilist Turn,” Florida State Law Review, 42 (1): 95150.
Manne, G. and Wright, J. (2011), “Google and the Limits of Antitrust: The Case against the Antitrust Case against Google,” Harvard Journal of Law and Public Policy, 34 (1): 171244.
Miller, C. C. (2010), “YouTube Ads Turn Videos into Revenue,” New York Times, September 2.
Mills, E. (2005), “Microsoft to Offer Book Search,” CNET, October 26, https://www.cnet.com/news/microsoft-to-offer-book-search/ (accessed January 4, 2018).
Newman, J. M. (2015), “Antitrust in Zero-Price Markets: Foundations,” University of Pennsylvania Law Review, 164: 149206.
Noam, E. M. (2009), Media Ownership and Concentration in America, Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Owsinski, B. (2016), “YouTube Has All the Leverage in New Label Negotiations,” Forbes, April 12, https://www.forbes.com/sites/bobbyowsinski/2016/04/12/youtube-has-all-the-leverage-in-new-label-negotiations/#4f064c9d1f91 (accessed January 4, 2018).
Paine, A. (2008), “RIAA Stops Suing Individuals over File-sharing,” Hollywood Reporter, December 19.
Patterson, M. R. (2013), “Google and Search-Engine Market Power,” Harvard Journal of Law & Technology Occasional Paper Series, http://jolt.law.harvard.edu/assets/misc/Patterson.pdf (accessed January 4, 2018).
Pessach, G. (2013), “Deconstructing Disintermediation: A Skeptical Copyright Perspective,” Cardozo Arts & Entertainment Law Journal, 31 (3): 833–73.
Pessach, G. (2017), “Some Realism about Copyright Skepticism,” IDEA: The IP Law Review, 57 (2): 225–78.
Plaintiffs’ Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Defendants’ Renewed Motion for Summary Judgment (2013), Viacom International Inc. et al. v. YouTube, Inc. et al., US District Court for the Southern District of New York, March 29.
Plant, A. (1934), “The Economic Aspects of Copyright in Books,” Economica, 1 (2): 167–95.
Recording Industry Association of America (2016), News and Notes on 2016 RIAA Shipment and Revenue Statistics, https://www.riaa.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/RIAA-2016-Year-End-News-Notes.pdf (accessed January 4, 2018).
Sandoval, G. (2012), “Google Play, Android become entertainment powerhouses,” CNET, October 12, https://www.cnet.com/news/google-play-android-becoming-entertainment-powerhouses/ (accessed January 4, 2018).
StatCounter GlobalStats (2017), http://gs.statcounter.com/os-market-share/mobile/worldwide (accessed January 31, 2017).
Teece, D. (1986), “Profiting from Technological Innovation: Implications for Integration, Collaboration, Licensing and Public Policy,” Research Policy, 15 (6): 285305.
Telang, R. and Waldfogel, J. (2014), “Piracy and New Production Creation: A Bollywood Story,” Working Paper, Carnegie Mellon University and University of Minnesota.
US Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission (2010), Horizontal Merger Guidelines.
Vuong, A. (2014), “Can MapQuest Reroute to Stay Relevant in Battle with Google Maps?” Denver Post, May 16.
Waldfogel, J. (2012a), “Music Piracy and its Effects on Demand, Supply and Welfare,” in Lerner, J. and Stern, S. (eds), Innovation Policy and the Economy (Vol. 12), Chicago: University of Chicago Press, pp. 91110.
Waldfogel, J. (2012b), “Copyright Protection, Technological Change, and the Quality of New Products: Evidence from Recorded Music since Napster,” Journal of Law and Economics, 55 (4): 715–40.
Weber, M. and Sutton, K. (2014), “Google Crushed Map Competition,” Wall Street Journal, January 16.
YouTube (2017), “How ContentID Works,” https://support.google.com/youtube/answer/2797370?hl=en (accessed January 4, 2018).
Recommend this journal

Email your librarian or administrator to recommend adding this journal to your organisation's collection.

Journal of Institutional Economics
  • ISSN: 1744-1374
  • EISSN: 1744-1382
  • URL: /core/journals/journal-of-institutional-economics
Please enter your name
Please enter a valid email address
Who would you like to send this to? *
×

Metrics

Full text views

Total number of HTML views: 0
Total number of PDF views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

Abstract views

Total abstract views: 0 *
Loading metrics...

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between <date>. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Usage data cannot currently be displayed