Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
Why Are We So Reluctant To "Execute" Microsoft?, Robert H. Lande
Why Are We So Reluctant To "Execute" Microsoft?, Robert H. Lande
All Faculty Scholarship
On June 28, 2001, the D.C. Court of Appeals held that Microsoft has violated the antitrust laws repeatedly, relentlessly, and over a multi-year period. The court ruled eight separate times that Microsoft engaged in conduct that illegally maintained its monopoly in PC operating systems. Despite these strongly worded conclusions concerning Microsoft’s liability, the court was extremely cautious when it considered whether to break up the company. It held that divestiture was a “radical” remedy that should be imposed with “great caution.”
The Perfect Caper?: Private Damages And The Microsoft Case, Robert H. Lande, James Langenfeld
The Perfect Caper?: Private Damages And The Microsoft Case, Robert H. Lande, James Langenfeld
All Faculty Scholarship
As readers of crime novels know, there are many definitions of the perfect caper. Under most, the perpetrator gets to keep its ill-gotten gains and goes unpunished. Even if the perpetrator is arrested and brought to trial, he or she still typically escapes punishment completely due to a variety of unusual circumstances. This is essentially what Professors John E. Lopatka and William H. Page are arguing about Microsoft's actions. They assert that even though Microsoft has violated the antitrust laws, it will not be made to pay for its anticompetitive conduct, at least not by private plaintiffs.
Resurrecting Incipiency: From Von's Grocery To Consumer Choice, Robert H. Lande
Resurrecting Incipiency: From Von's Grocery To Consumer Choice, Robert H. Lande
All Faculty Scholarship
The merger incipiency doctrine is virtually ignored in the courts today. This article argues that it should be resurrected, and it also explores the ways that effectuating Congressional intent in the area would reinvigorate merger policy.
The article documents how the legislative history of the antimerger statutes shows that Congress intended mergers to be evaluated under an incipiency approach, and explores the possible meanings of this idea. It then shows that this is a strong basis for reviving significantly stricter or more prophylactic merger enforcement.
The article shows how there are aspects of the doctrine that could be revived without …