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."
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."
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."
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 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."
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."
Abstract This paper takes a look at the anti-trust case against Microsoft, the charges against them, and the end result of the case. It then looks at the issues for and against Microsoft, with the author's personal view suggesting that Microsoft does more good than bad.
From the Paper "Since 1990, a battle has raged in United States courts between the United States government and the Microsoft Corporation out of Redmond, Washington, headed by Bill Gates. What is at stake is money. The federal government maintains that Microsoft's monopolistic practices are harmful to United States citizens, creating higher prices and potentially downgrading software quality, and should therefore be stopped, while Microsoft and its supporters claim that they are not breaking any laws, and are just doing good business."
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.
Abstract This essay discusses how Microsoft should either be broken up or be forced to alter its business or its products more fundamentally in order to reduce barriers to competition. This is because Microsoft has used its market power to destroy competition.
Abstract This paper explains that, in 1993, the Justice Department (DOJ) began an investigation into the allegations that (1) Microsoft used predatory pricing tactics to destroy competitors and eliminate competition in the marketplace and (2) erected technical barriers within their operating systems to make it difficult or impossible for non-Microsoft software to run on Windows; on July 15, 1994, in a consent decree, Microsoft agreed that it would not tie other Microsoft products into its Windows operating system. The author points out that this dominance was due to Microsoft's (1) development of a common user interface, which allows users to use similar commands in each of the individual application products, (2) concept of backward compatibility so that the older versions of applications work with newer versions of the operating system and (3) integration of its individual applications allowed users to create and use data between applications such as a spreadsheet created in Excel could be imported into a PowerPoint presentation. The paper continues to describe several other anti-trust cases such as the 2004 agreement with the Computer and Communications Industry Association (CCIA) and Novell.
From the Paper "In order to understand the environment in which the Microsoft anti-trust actions occurred, it is necessary to examine the beginnings of Microsoft. After an early career as a hacker, Bill Gates and Paul Allen founded Traf-O-Data in Seattle, Washington, a company started to develop and market a machine to generate traffic flow statistics. This machine was not the success that Gates and Allen hoped for, however. It may have been the youthfulness of the owners (Gates was 16), or it may have been that the state of Washington began to offer the same services for free."
Abstract Economics is oftentimes shaped by societal conditions and political decisions. Such is the case with business operations in the United States. Antitrust laws have gradually emerged to reflect the values and perspectives of American society. This paper presents a discussion of the historical context of anti-trust laws, an examination of individual antitrust laws and amendments and an overview of the implications such regulations have had on specific companies.
From the Paper "Just as the Sherman Antitrust Act affected some businesses, so too did the Clayton Act, its amendments, and the FTC. In the Standard Oil Co. of California and Standard Stations, Inc. versus the U.S. suit, the court declared the companies' tying agreements a violation of the Clayton Act and therefore illegal as they restricted free commerce. A similar decision was made regarding IBM after it was uncovered that the corporation required buyers of its computers to also purchase its brand-name punch cards (Dolan, 1983, pp. 253 & 254). A breach of the Celler-Kefauver Anti-merger Act was cited in a case involving Von's Grocery Company. The court ruled its merger with Shopping Bag Food Stores a violation of the Celler-Kefauver Anti-merger Act in that such an action decreased competition, albeit modestly (Dolan, pp. 252 & 253)."
Abstract The paper explains that anti-trust laws protect not only the small competitors from being taken out of business by predatory pricing attempts by the big league businesses, but also protects the consumer by protecting the free trade of competition in the market place. The paper examines the issue of below cost selling of products but notes the difficulty of proving that this is for the purpose of driving competition out of business. The paper discusses how small businesses must find other ways to compete and find their niche market in whatever field they are selling products and services.
From the Paper "The American Dream is a concept that is followed around the world. It is a concept based on the premise that if one has a good idea, and is willing to work hard one can achieve great success. Years ago, when America was in its infancy this held true without government interference but in more recent history it has become entirely too competitive to achieve the American Dream in some areas of business without some protection of the marketplace. The anti-trust laws are in place for the purpose of protecting the market place. It protects not only the small competitors from being taken out of business by predatory pricing attempts by the big league businesses, it also protects the consumer by protecting the free trade of competition in the market place."
Abstract One of the most visible anti-trust cases in the last decade has been the one of United States vs. Microsoft. This paper examines the question of whether anti-trust laws are applicable to high technology companies or whether they are anachronistic regulations enacted in a bygone era, incapable of being applied rationally to matters of technology businesses and competition. The recent antitrust suit directed at Microsoft is the nexus for this examination.
From the Paper "Many critics of the antitrust case against Microsoft feel that the Government has erred a fundamental way by failing to understand how competition works in high technology industries in general and software in particular. (DiLorenzo 2000) High technology, unlike traditional manufacturing, is widely characterized by "economies of scale," in which average costs of production fall sharply as output grows. As an example, it is very expensive to develop new software, costing upwards of millions of dollars and thousands man-hours, but the actually cost of putting another copy on a CD, once development is completed, is close to zero. (DiLorenzo)."
