- as they are intended to be. By using ist monopoly power to coerce agreements, MS has denied Netscape the primary channels for the distribution of Navigator and has, for good measure, prevented or made far more difficult consumer awareness of the Navigator alternative to the IE and the ability to download the Nav from the Internet. MS is attempting to crush the competition of netscapes browser and Suns Java and hence to preclude the likelihood of an alternative technology for OS and for using the Internet.MS of course belittle such restrictive agreements as being easy for consumers and competitors to evade.But then again, one ask oneself....if netscape isnt a threat to MS.....why does MS impose them???????SHERMAN ACT (1890)Covers- goods- servicesSection 1 requires- action by TWO or more =* the illegal act is the joining together in- Restraint of Trade=* RESTRAINT OF TRADE restricts or prevents business competitionGov’t must prove agreement MAY lead to a RESTRAINT OF TRADEFocuses on agreements that are restrictiveSection 2 requires- action by ONE =* a person or a combination of persons- misuse of monopoly=* Monopoly is where one has exclusive control over a good or serviceTwo doctrines adopted by Supreme Ct. Apply to Restraint of Trade cases-rule of reason =* Restraint of Trade that may led to monopolization is illegal, only if it is an unreasonable restraintDefense: it is a reasonable restraint of trade-per se actsvertical restraints =* restrains trade by using trade practices involving firms at different levels of the production/ distribution processes (such as exclusive dealing contracts)CLAYTON ACT (1914)Aimed at business practices that merely reduces competition or could lead to monopoly power concerning goodsFour sections =*two sections are amendments two are original Clayton ActSection 3 (original)- prohibits exclusive dealing agreements- prohibits tying arrangements if effect is to lessen competition substantially or tend ...
