Abstract
Is the current body of U.S. anti-trust law good public policy? This paper describes the roots and the current status of antitrust legislation in the U.S. with special mentioning of the Puerto Rican situation. It also covers the economic reasoning of antitrust in the light of per se unfair practices and business justification. Then, it moves on to give an overview of international antitrust regimes, namely EU, Germany, China and Brazil. It then discusses the call for loosening the law to create national champions that can compete on an international level.

Paper Outline:
Introduction
History of Antitrust Law
Public Policy Goals of Antitrust Legislation
Overview of The Economics of Antitrust
The Law: Per Se Deceptive and Unfair Business Practices and "Rule of Reason
Agencies
Consequences
International Perspective
Public Policy Discussion: The Need for National Champions?

From the Paper
"In a concentrated market, with only a few firms, the danger is that they may find it easier to lessen competition by colluding. For example, they may agree on the prices they will charge consumers. The collusion could be in (i) an explicit agreement, or in a more subtle form known as (ii) tacit coordination or coordinated interaction . Accordingly, some cases are easier than others. The courts decided many years ago that certain practices, such as price fixing, are so inherently harmful to consumers that a detailed examination is not necessary to determine whether they are reasonable. The law presumes that they are violations - so-called per se violations - and condemns them almost automatically. Other practices demand closer scrutiny based on principles that the courts and antitrust agencies have developed. These cases are examined under a "rule of reason" analysis."

Tags:cartel, consumer, legislation, oligopoly, sherman, trust, vertical

Abstract
Trusts are viewed as competition destroyers which attempt to control the market for a product. Anti-trust laws arose out of the abuse of such trusts and these laws persevere to this day. This paper questions whether the government's enforcement is executed when the economic climate is right or whether the enforcement is occurring at regular intervals. It also questions whether certain corporations, like Microsoft, are unwitting targets of the government. The overall question in this paper is whether the enforcement of anti-trust laws harms American competition. The response lies in the history of anti-trust laws, the enforcement of such laws and the meaning of competition within economic understanding.

Paper Outline:
Introduction
The History of Anti-trust Laws
The Sherman Anti-Trust Act (1890)
The Clayton Anti-Trust Act (1914)
The Federal Trade Commission Act (1914)
Robinson-Patman Act (1936), Celler-Kefauver Act (1950) and The Hart-Scott-Rodino Antitrust Improvements Act of 1976
Competition
Enforcement
Has the Microsoft Anti-trust Case Helped or Hindered American Competition?
Has the Hart-Scott-Rodino Act Helped or Hindered American Competition?
Conclusion

From the Paper
"In 1911, two decades after the Sherman Act was passed, the U.S. Supreme Court found that the Standard Oil Company and the American Tobacco Company exerted unlawful monopolistic authority. This was the first major court decision since the Act was passed. The two mentioned companies were forced to dissolve into smaller firms that would compete against each other. The courts have not been consistent when interpreting the meaning of monopoly power under the Sherman Act either."

Tags:ALCOA, Department, of, Justice, Bill, Gates, HSR, Act

Abstract
This paper first discusses the US Sherman Anti-Trust Act and the Clayton Act and how they helped eliminate some monopolies and price preferences. The paper then looks at several anti trust cases where the government attempted, sometimes successfully, to prosecute firms they considered in violation of the anti-trust acts. The paper also outlines the cases involving Standard Oil, Microsoft and Visa and Mastercard. Lastly, the paper considers whether the consumer really benefits from anti-trust legislation and whether there are some large scale enterprises which deserve monopoly status.

From the Paper
"These two major righting of corporate wrongs in American business helped eliminate some monopolies (railroads) and price preferences (steel, railroads, oil). Some railroad tycoons had been notorious for offering special price deals for freight of industries as long as they gave all their freight business to their railroads. Sometimes a group of companies would get together in order to control commerce. These were called "trusts" and therefore legislation to curb excessive practices became known. The political figure who spearheaded this anti-trust drive was Theodore Roosevelt. In fact, he became known as the "trust buster." As we have already seen, the Sherman Act was only the beginning. Even before Clayton was enacted, "in 1902 President Roosevelt decided to challenge...the holding company...thereby stopping a process of elimination (of competition" (orison 1965 820). In particular, this legislation (approved by the Supreme Court eventually) was focused on one man, Harriman, controlling four of the six transcontinental railways."

Tags:monopolies, regulation, dominance, Standard, Oil, Microsoft, Visa, Mastercard

Abstract
This paper begins by describing anti-trust law as any law restricting business practices considered unfair or monopolistic. It provides a history of the law in America's judicial system, covering the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890, the Clayton Act of 1914, and the Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914. The paper then discusses two key historic anti-trust cases in which the companies have been charged with anti-trust violations, American Telephone and Telegraph (1982) and Microsoft Corporation (1994 and 1998).

From the Paper
"AT&T was a natural monopoly, which needed to be broken up in order to allow others into the market. It was the only service provider at the time and in order to help improve the economy, it was important that changes be made to the status quo. Microsoft on the other hand, may be the dominant player in the world of operating systems, but there are other providers out there. Systems such as Linux and Unix are available for consumers. They may not be as user friendly as the Windows operating system, but there is a choice for the consumer. The question that needs to be asked is this: how is the consumer treated as a result of services being bundled in one package? Is the average consumer getting his money's worth? Are these services affordable? How efficient is this method of bundling? If the answers to all these questions benefit the customer, then Microsoft and any dominant player in a business, has done well."

Tags:FTC, Justice, Department, Explorer

Abstract
The anti-trust lawsuit brought against Microsoft Corporation is based on a variety of Microsoft strategies that are claimed to affect the browser industry at large. This paper analyzes the claims brought against Microsoft, as stated in the anti-trust lawsuit and the defense of Microsoft's business practices, as conveyed by news reports and press releases from the offices of Microsoft executives. These points of view, taken together, are an attempt to determine whether or not Microsoft's business strategies in the browser market have been an illegal method of obtaining a true monopoly of the industry, one which genuinely prohibits alternative browser development by non-Microsoft sources.

From the Paper
"AOL executive John Rose explained to the court that Compaq, one of the industry's leading manufacturers of personal computers, pre-installs both Microsoft and Netscape browsing software on all of its machines. [22] Thus, consumers are free to change their browsers at will, as often as they like. This testimony is a level blow to the idea that consumers are forced to use one type of browser over another. Yet it does not address the fact that when Internet Explorer comes pre-installed on any other type of PC, the end-user will still have easier access to the Internet via IE, if only because it saves the consumer the hassle of having to manually install a separate browser."

Tags:ISP, Gats, browser, Internet, Explorer, Brad, Chase

Abstract
This paper begins by examining the Microsoft case as an apparent illustration of the validity of anti-trust legislation. However, it then examines changes in corporate structure and operation that undermine traditional models of anti-trust legislation.

Abstract
This paper explains the role of the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in protecting consumers against anti-competitive or anti-trust behavior especially in fields, such as health care and health insurance. The paper presents a case study of the Wisconsin Chiropractic Association (WCA), which was penalized by the FTC for creating a conspiracy amongst WCA members to increase prices for chiropractic services and to boycott third-party payers for the purpose of obtaining higher reimbursement rates from health insurance companies. The paper considers the actions of the FTC to be justified.

Table of Contents:
The Role of the Federal Trade Commission
Conduct of the WCA: Anti-competitive behavior
Penalty: Fair or unfair?

From the Paper
"The misconduct did not simply end there: the WCA also circulated fee surveys to facilitate coordinated pricing by its members, thus demonstrating when certain members were 'undercharging' customers, which meant they would be contacted and encouraged to charge more. It aggressively pursued all its members and encouraged them to charge more money, urging chiropractors not only to squeeze more money from client's pockets but also to negotiate higher fees with health insurance companies."

Tags:consumers boycott insurance, fixing prices, fee surveys

Abstract
This paper shall summarize the current anti-trust court case against Microsoft (U.S. v. Microsoft) from the 1990's to the present.

Abstract
This five-page undergraduate paper answers the question about Microsoft and anti-trust issues. Microsoft was supposed to be broken up, and that is the position of the paper because monopoly is all about power.

Abstract
In this essay, the legal implications of the Microsoft Anti-Trust case are evaluated with regards to business law and new technologies. Several aspects of business technology standardization are considered and the role of consumer participation and corporate ethics are also discussed.