Innovation just as important for government Steel monopoly was insulated from the push-and-pull of competition: “With the market closely controlled and profits certain by following standard methods, those who control our trusts do not want the bother of developing anything new.” Industrial innovation was so important that he believed it deserved governmental support of the kind that had been given to American agriculture in the 19th Century. Brandeis understood the importance of industrial innovationĬriticizing trusts, Louis Brandeis concluded that a “huge organization is too clumsy to take up the development of a new idea.” He believed that the United States lagged Germany in adopting innovative approaches to steel manufacture because the U.S. We are well-acquainted with Brandeis’s invocation of the “laboratories of the states” but his reliance on experimentation, what we might today call innovation, runs much deeper than that well-known aphorism. The connective tissue that unites Brandeis’s view of legislative action, the creation and enforcement of antitrust law, and the use of sectoral regulation is the willingness to experiment.
This series is part of an ongoing examination of how to update Brandeis-and, more importantly, antitrust-for the digital age With publication of Louis Brandeis: A Man for This Season by the Colorado Technology Law Journal, Jon Sallet and the Benton Foundation are offering this new series, Updating Antitrust for a New Age, adapted from that article to demonstrate that progressive competition policy incorporated both the goals and the means that Brandeis believed would provide the strongest tools to fight against the trusts and the monopolies of his day. Wednesday, MaDigital Beat Brandeis and the Willingness to Innovate
0 kommentar(er)
