{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

BUS 670 WK4ass - Claims 1 Antitrust Claims Jennifer Baxter...

Info iconThis preview shows pages 1–3. Sign up to view the full content.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Claims 1 Antitrust Claims Jennifer Baxter BUS 670 Professor Little May 9, 2011
Background image of page 1

Info iconThis preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document Right Arrow Icon
Claims 2 Competitive market structures have existed in the business world since the Civil War when wartime economic booms fostered the industrial revolution. With rapid advances in manufacturing and machinery and large business entities dominating the industries, the public demanded a policy be comprised in order to preserve small competitors and prevent the accumulation of great economic power among only a few firms. The government responded to this public outcry by adopting the Sherman Act, an antitrust policy (later supplemented with the Clayton Act and Robinson-Patman Act) which favored, as well as promoted, competitive market structures as the most efficient means of allocating social resources (Mallor et al, 2010, p 1254). Despite competition laws in place to govern and protect economic efficiency, corporate giants violate these antitrust policies, claiming to merely be acting aggressively in order to remain competitive in the marketplace. Such was the case with United States v. Microsoft when software giant Microsoft came under scrutiny with their alleged abusive monopolistic practices, according to Bishop (2007). Monopoly power is described by Mallor et al (2010) as “the power to fix prices or exclude competitors in a given market” (p 1273). Moreover, this power is “inferred from the fact that a firm has captured a predominant share of the relevant market” (p 1273 ).
Background image of page 2
Image of page 3
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}