Does the per se rule in antitrust law remain viable? The U.S. Supreme Court has oscillated in its own application of the doctrine, creating some uncertainty
Article Abstract:
The Supreme Court has changed its rulings on the per se rule over time, with its first application in price fixing cases, and from the 1970s on, the court has reconsidered its use of the per se rule, recognizing that some restraints previously ruled illegal per se might indeed be pro-competitive and merit analysis according to the rule of reason, which permits balancing pro-competitive benefits with anti-competitive harms. The court has moved towards the position that the per se rule should be used only in exceptional cases and by the late 1990s, better conformed its rulings to that principle.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1998
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Computer maintenance raises antitrust issues; manufacturers should think twice before restricting access to problem-solving software
Article Abstract:
Manufacturers who want to avoid antitrust claims should not force customers to buy competitively available products and to include maintenance and repair as a condition for being able to buy the copyrighted product. The potential antitrust issue arises when the manufacturer refuses to license independent service firms or other competititors to use its operating or problem-finding software. The independent service firm may also be violating the manufacturer's software copyrights by using such software without a license. Many recent cases have provided guidance on this issue.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1996
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
Congress to consider data base bill; the Copyright Office issues a report on data base protection; hearings could begin this fall
Article Abstract:
The US Copyright Office issued a report on data base protection on Aug 21, 1997, which analyzes such issues as whether more data base protection is needed, should scientific or public interest uses should be exemptions under the new law, and even if such a law would be constitutional. The report also details differences in opinion over the EU Database Directive, where offering a protection of data base content stronger than copyright necessitate a change in US law. The US Congress is expected to use the report in its consideration of data base legislation in late 1997.
Publication Name: The National Law Journal
Subject: Law
ISSN: 0162-7325
Year: 1997
User Contributions:
Comment about this article or add new information about this topic:
- Abstracts: DART is aimed at construction bulls-eye. Supreme Court: FAA preempts state law on the question of punitive damages
- Abstracts: The Delaware Supreme Court, in two recent decisions, has clarified the application of the corporate-opportunity doctrine
- Abstracts: Tragedy leads to air bag crusade. Time for Supreme Court to mop up a mess. Government settles case on nuke plant 'taking.' (Oak Ridge nuclear weapons plant)
- Abstracts: The lobbying deduction disallowance: policy considerations, comparisons, and structuring activities under amended section 162(e)
- Abstracts: 'Zurko' raises issue of patentability standards; high court to rule on whether agency deference should apply to PTO patentability decisions