Market Definition in Monopoly Cases: A Paradigm is Missing
19 Pages Posted: 13 Nov 2005
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
JEL Classification: K21, L12, L41
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
-
"Market Definition in Monopoly Cases: A Paradigm is Missing,"
-
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