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?
-
Podcast, here .
-
Course Description Competition policy has long been regarded as an essential framework for any economy based on market exchange. Its logic...
-
Euractiv, here. While some influential US/EU academics want us to largely forget the DMA and go back to a revised 102 😔.
-
OECD, here. Tbd today, Trento U.
-
Video here . Pre-print Paper here (advance article published by JECLAP on the day she died, here ) 2023 Presentation at the "Professo... -
C. Ortiz, here.
-
Socalled " Guidelines " (Linee guida sulla gestione dei diritti d'autore nelle università) by the AIDRO (Associazione Italiana...
-
The European Council, here .