"Market Definition in Monopoly Cases: A Paradigm is Missing,"
19 Pages Posted: 13 Oct 2008
Date Written: March 2005
Abstract
The question of market definition for monopolization cases and thus the issue of the possession of market power by the defendant is crucial for the outcome of these cases. However, unlike antitrust merger analysis, where the DOJ-FTC Horizontal Merger Guidelines has provided a successful paradigm for market definition, monopolization cases lack a guiding market definition paradigm. This chapter addresses this issue, shows the problems that arise when a market definition paradigm is absent, and offers some partial remedies. The best remedy, though, would be the development of a suitable market definition paradigm for these cases.
Keywords: antitrust, monopolization, market definition
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Do you have negative results from your research you’d like to share?
Recommended Papers
-
Staples-Office Depot and Up-Sp: An Antitrust Tale of Two Proposed Mergers
-
Market Definition in Monopolization Cases: A Paradigm is Missing
-
By Philip B Nelson and Lawrence J. White
-
Antitrust Policy During the Clinton Administration
By Carl Shapiro and Robert E. Litan
-
Has the Consumer Harm Standard Lost its Teeth?
By Howard H. Chang, David S. Evans, ...
-
Horizontal Merger Antitrust Enforcement: Some Historical Perspectives, Some Current Observations
-
Horizontal Merger Antitrust Enforcement: Some Historical Perspectives, Some Current Observations
-
Market Definition and Market Power in Payment Card Networks: Some Comments and Considerations
-
Market Definition and Market Power in Payment Card Networks: Some Comments and Considerations