JOURNAL ARTICLE

On the virtue and value of 'little' monopolization cases.

  • Published In: Journal of Antitrust Enforcement, 2023, v. 11, n. 2. P. 191 1 of 3

  • Database: Business Source Ultimate 2 of 3

  • Authored By: Gavil, Andrew I 3 of 3

Abstract

Keywords: Antitrust; Competition; Federal Trade Commission; Monopoly; Monopolization; Sherman Act; K21; L4; L40; L41 EN Antitrust Competition Federal Trade Commission Monopoly Monopolization Sherman Act K21 L4 L40 L41 191 196 6 08/11/23 20230701 NES 230701 I. INTRODUCTION Government enforcement of section 2 of the Sherman Act is often associated with the "big" case. Regardless of the case outcome, it continues to serve as the precedent cited by the Supreme Court for the required elements of the monopolization offence[18] and by almost every court to face a monopolization claim. Surescripts sought summary judgment on both of the FTC's claims of unlawful monopolization. This section profiles two of the FTC's current monopolization cases. [Extracted from the article]

Additional Information

  • Source:Journal of Antitrust Enforcement. 2023/07, Vol. 11, Issue 2, p191
  • Document Type:Article
  • Subject Area:Law
  • Publication Date:2023
  • ISSN:2050-0688
  • DOI:10.1093/jaenfo/jnad033
  • Accession Number:169851082
  • Copyright Statement:Copyright of Journal of Antitrust Enforcement is the property of Oxford University Press / USA and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites without the copyright holder's express written permission. Additionally, content may not be used with any artificial intelligence tools or machine learning technologies. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Looking to go deeper into this topic? Look for more articles on EBSCOhost.