By Keith N. Hylton
This complete booklet presents an intensive evaluation of the key issues of antitrust legislation from an monetary standpoint. Its in-depth therapy and research of either the legislations and economics of antitrust is gifted through a suite of interconnected unique essays. The contributing authors are one of the such a lot influential students in antitrust, with a wealthy variety of backgrounds. Their entries conceal, among different matters, predatory pricing, crucial amenities, tying, vertical restraints, enforcement, mergers, marketplace energy, monopolization criteria, and facilitating practices. This well-organized and gigantic paintings may be priceless to professors of yankee antitrust legislation and eu pageant legislation, in addition to scholars focusing on pageant legislation. it is going to even be an incredible reference for professors and graduate scholars of economics and enterprise.
Read or Download Antitrust Law and Economics, 2nd edition (Encyclopedia of Law and Economics) PDF
Best economy books
Marid Audran has develop into every little thing he as soon as despised. no longer goodbye in the past, he was once a hustler within the Budayeen, an Arabian ghetto in a Balkanized destiny Earth. again then, as usually as no longer, he did not have the money to shop for himself a drink. yet he had his independence. Now Marid works for Friedlander Bey, "godfather" of the Budayeen, a guy whose energy stretches throughout a shattered, crumbling international.
The Economics of Innovation is a brand new identify within the Routledge significant Works sequence, serious ideas in Economics. Edited by way of Cristiano Antonelli, a number one student within the box, it's a four-volume selection of canonical and the easiest state of the art learn. Many may argue that the economics of innovation is based at the paintings of Joseph Schumpeter (1883–1950), even though its origins is also traced to the writings of Adam Smith (1723–90) and Karl Marx (1818–83).
The outline for this booklet, The Economics of Uncertainty. (PSME-2), may be imminent.
- Pauline Frommer's Italy, Second Edition (Pauline Frommer Guides)
- Upgrading Clusters and Small Enterprises in Developing Countries (Ashgate Economic Geography)
- OECD Economic Surveys 2005: New Zealand
- OECD Investment Policy Reviews: Peru
Extra info for Antitrust Law and Economics, 2nd edition (Encyclopedia of Law and Economics)
In general, the Department of Justice enforces the Sherman Act, the FTC enforces the FTC Act (which means basically the same thing as the Sherman Act), and both agencies enforce the Clayton and Robinson-Patman Acts. Some of the FTC’s potential comparative advantages are not exploited. For example, the FTC does not engage in rule-making on issues of antitrust substance even though a statute gives it that power. gov/opa/2002/02/clearance/ftcdojagree. pdf. Id. at Appendix A. Hawaii v. S. 251 (1972).
See generally Hylton, K. (2003), Antitrust Law: Economic Theory & Common Law Evolution, Cambridge, UK and New York, NY: Cambridge University Press, 43–4; Landes, W. (1983), ‘Optimal Sanctions for Antitrust Violations’, U. Chi. L. , 50, 652; Becker, G. (1968), ‘Crime & Punishment: An Economic Approach’, J. Pol. , 76, 169–217. Illinois Brick Co. v. S. 720, 746 (1977). In Illinois Brick, the Court held that only ‘direct purchasers’ have standing to sue for overcharges resulting from anticompetitive behavior, a holding that may be satisfactory from a deterrence perspective but not from a compensation perspective since the ‘direct purchasers’ are often wholesalers or retailers who simply pass on the overcharge to the consumer.
L. Rev. , Facilitating Practices: The Ethyl Case (1984), in The Antitrust Revolution: Economics, Competition and Policy 182–201 (John E. Kwoka, Jr. & Lawrence J. J. 991, 991–1006 (2001). The enforcement campaign also used the term ‘shared monopoly’. , Oligopoly, Shared Monopoly, and Antitrust Law, 67 Cornell L. Rev. 439, 453 (1982). html. Id. 10. D. M. Owen, Coordinated Interaction and Clayton § 7 Enforcement, 12 Geo. Mason L. Rev. 89, 101–02 (2003). Copperweld Corp. v. S. 752, 768–9 (1984).