Diamonds are Forever Implications of United States Antitrust Sta.pdf

COMMENTS
DIAMONDS ARE FOREVER? IMPLICATIONS OF UNITED STATES
ANTITRUST
STATUTES ON INTERNATIONAL TRADE AND THE
DE
BEERS DIAMOND CARTEL
Diamonds are forever-or at least they should be, given the over-inflated
prices Americans pay for them.
Many Americans hold diamonds in high
esteem, cherishing them as symbols of love and affection. Perhaps
this
explains why
Americans are willing to pay far more for diamonds than they
should. On the other hand, perhaps the real reason is the diamond cartel and
the inability of the United States
Government to apply the antitrust laws for
the protection of the American public as they were originally intended.
Americans typically end up purchasing a diamond that they mistakenly
believe has high extrinsic value, and for other reasons that cannot be
rationally explained.
The American people sought to prevent these types of
situations from occurring almost a hundred years ago when they enacted the
first antitrust statute. ' Now, the average lay person may not even know the
legal definition of "antitrust," which very likely only elicits the notion
that
the government "protects" consumers by
restricting monopolies.
2
No doubt
people would be surprised
to discover that they are paying inflated prices
because the United States Government has been unable to enforce the
spirit
of the antitrust laws against the large, powerful international diamond cartel.
Indeed, the business of importing and selling diamonds in the United States
is but one example of the failure of United States
antitrust laws against
international
cartels.
The United States will become more
dependant on international trade for
its economic growth and survival as the global economy becomes more
pervasive.
3
That trade must be fair, not only to foreign countries, but also
to the United States. By studying and understanding the
lack of control
United States antitrust statutes have on the diamond industry, the United
States will be in a better position to solve not only the diamond problem, but
also the problem of other monopolistic industries.
1. See W.W.
THORNTON,
A
TREATISE ON COMBINATIONS IN RESTRAINT OF TRADE §
7,
at
10 (2d ed. 1928).
2. A monopoly is "[a] privilege or peculiar advantage vested in one or more persons or
companies, consisting in the exclusive right (or power) to carry on a particular business or trade,
manufacture a particular article, or control the sale of the whole supply of a particular
commodity." BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY 1007 (6th ed. 1990). Two or more monopolistic
producers acting in concert comprise a cartel, i.e. "[a] combination of producers of any
product
joined together to control its production, sale, and price, so as to obtain a monopoly and restrict
competition in any particular industry or commodity." Id. at 215 (6th ed. 1990).