Law Commons^™

The Political Economy Of International Antitrust Harmonization, John O. Mcginnis

William & Mary Law Review

No abstract provided.

Monopoly Power In The Electronic Information Industry: Why, And So What?, Curt A. Hessler

ExpressO

This "law and economics" article diagnoses why monopoly power infects so many markets in the electronic media, communications, and information technology industries (collectively the "Industry"),and recommends changes to prevailing intellectual property and antitrust doctrines to remedy this problem.

The analysis focuses on a single "norm" -- the maximization of economic value, as defined by standard welfare economic theory. Identifying three distinct functions that operate throughout this otherwise diverse Industry -- authoring, publishing, and distribution -- the article notes that two economic peculiarities characterize most Industry markets: the technical feasibility of "non-rivalrous use" of digitized information products, and the frequent "creative …

Raising Rivals' Costs: Can The Agencies Do More Good Than Harm?, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Competitive Price Discrimination: The Exercise Of Market Power Without Anticompetitive Effects (Comment On Klein And Wiley), Jonathan Baker

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

A firm that discriminates in prices faces a downward sloping demand curve, and thus could potentially raise price by reducing output. For this reason, evidence of price discrimination is relevant to assessing the possibility of market power, as antitrust law has long recognized. But price discrimination can be beneficial as well as harmful, and can reasonably be termed competitive if entry is easy. Hence a demonstration that entry is easy rebuts the inference of anticompetitive effect when price discrimination is the basis for proof of market power, breaking the link between market power and anticompetitive effect. Klein and Wiley's proposal …

The Byrd Amendment Is Wto-Illegal: But We Must Kill The Byrd With The Right Stone, Jagdish N. Bhagwati, Petros C. Mavroidis

Faculty Scholarship

On 16 January 2003, the WTO Appellate Body issued its report on United States – Continued Dumping And Subsidy Offset Act Of 2000 (WTO Doc. WT/DS217 and 234/AB/R). In this report, the Appellate Body condemned the so-called US Byrd Amendment by finding that it was inconsistent with the US obligations under the WTO Agreements on Antidumping (AD) and Subsidies and Countervailing Measures (SCM).