U.S. Justice Department on 'attempted' monopolization: anticompetitive practices are lawful without 'market power.'
Article Abstract:
The US Supreme Court in Spectrum Sports v. McQuillan limited Sherman Act section 2 actions by requiring antitrust plaintiffs alleging anticompetitive practices to show market power and probability of developing monopoly power. Section 2 had been used to attack individual firm behavior while section 1 addressed collusion between firms. The Court accepted the views identified in the amicus brief of Pres. Bush's Solicitor General. Spectrum Sports renders section 2 of the Sherman Act ineffective and gives firms without provable market power the freedom to act anticompetitively.
Publication Name: Antitrust Law and Economics Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0003-6048
Year: 1992
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Microsoft's illegal conduct: text of Netscape's letter to the U.S. Justice Department
Article Abstract:
A letter to the US Dept of Justice cites Microsoft's apparently illegal conduct regarding its competitors. The letter, from Netscape's legal counsel, accuses Microsoft of predatory pricing policies, illegal side payments, improper discounting, coercing its suppliers, buying exclusivity, and other improprieties. The letter also states that Microsoft has attempted to monopolize the market and drive out competitors such as Netscape. The pending Consent Decree is also discussed.
Publication Name: Antitrust Law and Economics Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0003-6048
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
The case for monopoly and no rebuttal: George Mason's 'Econlaw' discussion group
Article Abstract:
Internet discussion groups on anti-monopoly policy have a bias against including non-Chicago school attitudes, just as 'law and economics' print journals and seminars for US judges and academics exclude non-Chicago attitudes. Any effort to express an opposing point of view on an online discussion group is met by the Internet practice known as 'flaming' and by the offender's dismissal forthwith. Posts to Internet disussion groups are given.
Publication Name: Antitrust Law and Economics Review
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0003-6048
Year: 1997
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: Survey: students loath to differ politically with their professors. ADR in the classroom: the move from more adversarial lawyering
- Abstracts: New law affects the treatment of distributions from retirement plans. Antenuptial agreement didn't waive surviving spouse's right to retirement plan benefit
- Abstracts: A drive to stifle litigation: Chrysler tries to slam door on class actions it calls frivolous with a lawsuit and a request for sanctions
- Abstracts: Injury to competitors is injury to competition: predatory pricing under state law. Efficiencies in merger cases: technological 'diffusion' as the cure for short-run monopoly pricing