Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
-
- Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. v. Aspen Skiing Co. (1)
- CSU L.L.C. v. Xerox Corp. (1)
- City of Pittsburgh v. West Penn Power Co (1)
- Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services Inc (1)
- FCC (1)
-
- Federal Communications Commission (1)
- ISO (1)
- Kodak (1)
- LEC (1)
- Local exchange carrier (1)
- OEM (1)
- Otter Tail Power Co. v. United States (1)
- PSC (1)
- Public Service Commission (1)
- Sherman Act (1)
- Telecommunications Act of 1996 (1)
- Town of Concord v. Boston Edison Co. (1)
- USPTO (1)
- United States Patent and Trademark Office (1)
- United States v. Marine Bancorporation (1)
- Verizon Communications Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko (1)
Articles 1 - 2 of 2
Full-Text Articles in Law
A New Method For Regulatory Antitrust Analysis? Verizon Communications Inc. V. Trinko, James E. Scheuermann, William D. Semins
A New Method For Regulatory Antitrust Analysis? Verizon Communications Inc. V. Trinko, James E. Scheuermann, William D. Semins
Richmond Journal of Law & Technology
It is a commonplace to speak of the application of law to facts. Application is a practical art, and thus involves method. Curiously, there is a paucity of discussion of the various methods by which substantive legal standards are applied to facts. This omission is significant. Method is not outcome-determinative in all cases, but, at a minimum, it guides analysis, opening certain possibilities and foreclosing others.
When Does A Patent Right Become An Antitrust Wrong? Antitrust Liability For Refusals To Deal In Patented Goods, Aaron B. Rabinowitz
When Does A Patent Right Become An Antitrust Wrong? Antitrust Liability For Refusals To Deal In Patented Goods, Aaron B. Rabinowitz
Richmond Journal of Law & Technology
[T]he benefit even of limited monopolies is too doubtful to be opposed to that of their general suppression.At the border of intellectual property monopolies and antitrust markets lies a field of dissonance yet to be harmonized by statute or the Supreme Court.