Here the text of the complaint. The facts can be briefly reckoned as follows: - AT&T is the exclusive provider for iPhone cell phone service in the United States; - the duration of the exclusive agreement is to be five years; - Apple is to receive a portion of AT&T’s profit; - iPhone consumers are to be prohibited from using a cell phone carrier other than AT&T; - Apple is to be restrained for a period of time from developing a version of the iPhone for CDMA wireless networks.
As far as competition law is concerned, the facts invest the tying doctrine. In this case, the tying product is the iPhone, whereas the tied product is AT&T's cell phone service.One of the central questions would be: Has Apple sufficient economic power in the tying market to coerce the purchase of the tied product?
-
.png)
EC, here . [NotebookLM's own DeepDive here , just for fun] In our Article 19 Report we discussed this and how it could eventually trans... -
In the US, here . I posed the question this morning and received an answer within 30 minutes. That was efficient, thank you!
-
Here. Comments are all ❤️❤️❤️ for her, nice to see! A class apart as antitrust enforcer.
-
Here.
-
Here .
-
E.Klein, here.
-
Here . [I watched it all, pretty weird - the journalist was amazing]
-
Here . We've been playing ourselves with the idea of a DMA Lab for more than a year...Competition! [We didn't hear about Panelis...
No comments:
Post a Comment