Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Second, Section 7 of the Clayton Act restricts the mergers and acquisitions of organizations that may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly. Third, Section 2 of the Sherman Act prohibits monopolization. [2] Federal antitrust laws provide for both civil and criminal enforcement.
In economics, a government-granted monopoly (also called a "de jure monopoly" or "regulated monopoly") is a form of coercive monopoly by which a government grants exclusive privilege to a private individual or firm to be the sole provider of a good or service; potential competitors are excluded from the market by law, regulation, or other mechanisms of government enforcement.
For example, in some cases, utilities (such as those providing electricity or water) may operate as natural monopolies due to high infrastructure and distribution costs. Technology monopoly: This type of monopoly occurs when one company has exclusive control over a particular technology or innovation, thus enabling them to dominate the market.
The firm then attempts to maximize profits in each segment by equating MR and MC, [52] [61] [62] Generally the company charges a higher price to the group with a more price inelastic demand and a relatively lesser price to the group with a more elastic demand. [63] Examples of third degree price discrimination abound.
It is also known as antitrust law (or just antitrust [4]), anti-monopoly law, [1] and trade practices law; the act of pushing for antitrust measures or attacking monopolistic companies (known as trusts) is commonly known as trust busting. [5] The history of competition law reaches back to the Roman Empire.
Standard Oil (Refinery No. 1 in Cleveland, Ohio, pictured) was a major company broken up under United States antitrust laws.. The history of United States antitrust law is generally taken to begin with the Sherman Antitrust Act 1890, although some form of policy to regulate competition in the market economy has existed throughout the common law's history.
Section 2 of the Act forbids monopoly. In Section 2 cases, the court has, again on its own initiative, drawn a distinction between coercive and innocent monopoly. The act is not meant to punish businesses that come to dominate their market passively or on their own merit, only those that intentionally dominate the market through misconduct ...
Monopolization is defined as the situation when a firm with durable and significant market power. For the court, it will evaluate the firm’s market share. Usually, a monopolized firm has more than 50% market share in a certain geographic area. Some state courts have higher market share requirements for this definition.