DIVERGENCES TRANSATLANTIQUES EN MATIÈRE D'APPLICATION DE LA THÉORIE DES FACILITÉS ESSENTIELLES AUX ACTIFS IMMATÉRIELS(1)

While the US Supreme Court, throughout its judgment in Trinko, rejects the essential facilities doctrine, in the European Union it is not only accepted but even extended to intangible assets. Two contradictory conceptions of competition prevail on either sides of the Atlantic, with regard to the imp...

Full description

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Published in:Revue d'économie industrielle 2010-01 (129/130), p.277
Main Authors: Marty, Frédéric, Pillot, Julien
Format: Article
Language:fre
Subjects:
Antitrust
Antitrust laws
Competition
Court decisions
Innovations
Intangible assets
Legal studies
Online Access:Get full text
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
cited_by
cites
container_end_page
container_issue 129/130
container_start_page 277
container_title Revue d'économie industrielle
container_volume
creator Marty, Frédéric
Pillot, Julien
description While the US Supreme Court, throughout its judgment in Trinko, rejects the essential facilities doctrine, in the European Union it is not only accepted but even extended to intangible assets. Two contradictory conceptions of competition prevail on either sides of the Atlantic, with regard to the importance of market structures and the question of incentives to innovate. As a pertinent illustration of these different conceptions of competition policies, the Microsoft case seems very eloquent. This article sets out the grounds of the US and EU antitrust authorities' decisions in regard to refusal to deal litigations. In this way, we will spotlight the dominant economic doctrines on both sides of the Atlantic. [PUB ABSTRACT]
format article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_journals_872842124</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2379751971</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-p607-275a34eac8bdb66196509d654e52c90757addf152f2c309f04112a4abd2644cf3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNotjUtOwzAYhC0EEqFwB4sNsIjkZ5wsrcRpLblJiV3ErspzUSFaGrrrAci5cjEswWo08__zzRUIsBA0RDiJr0GAMGchJSS5BXfjuEeIM4bjAFwy_aaqpSpSZaGrZGGlM7Jw-nXrA1XAtXR6_qkUzJ7kZmN06n1ZwExBI6FbzVNZaX_0z7lMtdFunnzPWuUZyhify-07lKnTuYV67XHz5BvGPuOXe3Az1B9j__CvC-By5dJVaMqlHzLhMUIiJILXlPV1GzddE0U4iThKuoiznpM2QYKLuusGzMlAWoqSATGMSc3qpiMRY-1AF-DxD3s8Hb7O_fi92x_Op0-_uIsFiRnBhNFfsKRSCA</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>872842124</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>DIVERGENCES TRANSATLANTIQUES EN MATIÈRE D'APPLICATION DE LA THÉORIE DES FACILITÉS ESSENTIELLES AUX ACTIFS IMMATÉRIELS(1)</title><source>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</source><source>ABI/INFORM global</source><creator>Marty, Frédéric ; Pillot, Julien</creator><creatorcontrib>Marty, Frédéric ; Pillot, Julien</creatorcontrib><description>While the US Supreme Court, throughout its judgment in Trinko, rejects the essential facilities doctrine, in the European Union it is not only accepted but even extended to intangible assets. Two contradictory conceptions of competition prevail on either sides of the Atlantic, with regard to the importance of market structures and the question of incentives to innovate. As a pertinent illustration of these different conceptions of competition policies, the Microsoft case seems very eloquent. This article sets out the grounds of the US and EU antitrust authorities' decisions in regard to refusal to deal litigations. In this way, we will spotlight the dominant economic doctrines on both sides of the Atlantic. [PUB ABSTRACT]</description><identifier>ISSN: 0154-3229</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1773-0198</identifier><language>fre</language><publisher>Brussels: Editions De Boeck Superieur</publisher><subject>Antitrust ; Antitrust laws ; Competition ; Court decisions ; Innovations ; Intangible assets ; Legal studies</subject><ispartof>Revue d'économie industrielle, 2010-01 (129/130), p.277</ispartof><rights>Copyright Editions Techniques et Economiques Mar-Jun 2010</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/872842124/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/872842124?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,780,784,11688,12847,33223,36060,44363,74895</link.rule.ids></links><search><creatorcontrib>Marty, Frédéric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pillot, Julien</creatorcontrib><title>DIVERGENCES TRANSATLANTIQUES EN MATIÈRE D'APPLICATION DE LA THÉORIE DES FACILITÉS ESSENTIELLES AUX ACTIFS IMMATÉRIELS(1)</title><title>Revue d'économie industrielle</title><description>While the US Supreme Court, throughout its judgment in Trinko, rejects the essential facilities doctrine, in the European Union it is not only accepted but even extended to intangible assets. Two contradictory conceptions of competition prevail on either sides of the Atlantic, with regard to the importance of market structures and the question of incentives to innovate. As a pertinent illustration of these different conceptions of competition policies, the Microsoft case seems very eloquent. This article sets out the grounds of the US and EU antitrust authorities' decisions in regard to refusal to deal litigations. In this way, we will spotlight the dominant economic doctrines on both sides of the Atlantic. [PUB ABSTRACT]</description><subject>Antitrust</subject><subject>Antitrust laws</subject><subject>Competition</subject><subject>Court decisions</subject><subject>Innovations</subject><subject>Intangible assets</subject><subject>Legal studies</subject><issn>0154-3229</issn><issn>1773-0198</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2010</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>8BJ</sourceid><sourceid>M0C</sourceid><recordid>eNotjUtOwzAYhC0EEqFwB4sNsIjkZ5wsrcRpLblJiV3ErspzUSFaGrrrAci5cjEswWo08__zzRUIsBA0RDiJr0GAMGchJSS5BXfjuEeIM4bjAFwy_aaqpSpSZaGrZGGlM7Jw-nXrA1XAtXR6_qkUzJ7kZmN06n1ZwExBI6FbzVNZaX_0z7lMtdFunnzPWuUZyhify-07lKnTuYV67XHz5BvGPuOXe3Az1B9j__CvC-By5dJVaMqlHzLhMUIiJILXlPV1GzddE0U4iThKuoiznpM2QYKLuusGzMlAWoqSATGMSc3qpiMRY-1AF-DxD3s8Hb7O_fi92x_Op0-_uIsFiRnBhNFfsKRSCA</recordid><startdate>20100101</startdate><enddate>20100101</enddate><creator>Marty, Frédéric</creator><creator>Pillot, Julien</creator><general>Editions De Boeck Superieur</general><scope>3V.</scope><scope>7RO</scope><scope>7WY</scope><scope>7WZ</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>87Z</scope><scope>8BJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8FL</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>AXJJW</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>BEZIV</scope><scope>BFMQW</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FQK</scope><scope>FRNLG</scope><scope>F~G</scope><scope>JBE</scope><scope>K60</scope><scope>K6~</scope><scope>L.-</scope><scope>M0C</scope><scope>PQBIZ</scope><scope>PQBZA</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PYYUZ</scope><scope>Q9U</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20100101</creationdate><title>DIVERGENCES TRANSATLANTIQUES EN MATIÈRE D'APPLICATION DE LA THÉORIE DES FACILITÉS ESSENTIELLES AUX ACTIFS IMMATÉRIELS(1)</title><author>Marty, Frédéric ; Pillot, Julien</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p607-275a34eac8bdb66196509d654e52c90757addf152f2c309f04112a4abd2644cf3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>fre</language><creationdate>2010</creationdate><topic>Antitrust</topic><topic>Antitrust laws</topic><topic>Competition</topic><topic>Court decisions</topic><topic>Innovations</topic><topic>Intangible assets</topic><topic>Legal studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Marty, Frédéric</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Pillot, Julien</creatorcontrib><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Asian Business Database</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (PDF only)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Asian &amp; European Business Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection</collection><collection>Continental Europe Database</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>Business Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Global (Corporate)</collection><collection>International Bibliography of the Social Sciences</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Business Collection</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Professional Advanced</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM global</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business</collection><collection>ProQuest One Business (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ABI/INFORM Collection China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><jtitle>Revue d'économie industrielle</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Marty, Frédéric</au><au>Pillot, Julien</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>DIVERGENCES TRANSATLANTIQUES EN MATIÈRE D'APPLICATION DE LA THÉORIE DES FACILITÉS ESSENTIELLES AUX ACTIFS IMMATÉRIELS(1)</atitle><jtitle>Revue d'économie industrielle</jtitle><date>2010-01-01</date><risdate>2010</risdate><issue>129/130</issue><spage>277</spage><pages>277-</pages><issn>0154-3229</issn><eissn>1773-0198</eissn><abstract>While the US Supreme Court, throughout its judgment in Trinko, rejects the essential facilities doctrine, in the European Union it is not only accepted but even extended to intangible assets. Two contradictory conceptions of competition prevail on either sides of the Atlantic, with regard to the importance of market structures and the question of incentives to innovate. As a pertinent illustration of these different conceptions of competition policies, the Microsoft case seems very eloquent. This article sets out the grounds of the US and EU antitrust authorities' decisions in regard to refusal to deal litigations. In this way, we will spotlight the dominant economic doctrines on both sides of the Atlantic. [PUB ABSTRACT]</abstract><cop>Brussels</cop><pub>Editions De Boeck Superieur</pub></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0154-3229
ispartof Revue d'économie industrielle, 2010-01 (129/130), p.277
issn 0154-3229
1773-0198
language fre
recordid cdi_proquest_journals_872842124
source International Bibliography of the Social Sciences (IBSS); ABI/INFORM global
subjects Antitrust
Antitrust laws
Competition
Court decisions
Innovations
Intangible assets
Legal studies
title DIVERGENCES TRANSATLANTIQUES EN MATIÈRE D'APPLICATION DE LA THÉORIE DES FACILITÉS ESSENTIELLES AUX ACTIFS IMMATÉRIELS(1)
url http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-30T23%3A33%3A22IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=DIVERGENCES%20TRANSATLANTIQUES%20EN%20MATI%C3%88RE%20D'APPLICATION%20DE%20LA%20TH%C3%89ORIE%20DES%20FACILIT%C3%89S%20ESSENTIELLES%20AUX%20ACTIFS%20IMMAT%C3%89RIELS(1)&rft.jtitle=Revue%20d'%C3%A9conomie%20industrielle&rft.au=Marty,%20Fr%C3%A9d%C3%A9ric&rft.date=2010-01-01&rft.issue=129/130&rft.spage=277&rft.pages=277-&rft.issn=0154-3229&rft.eissn=1773-0198&rft_id=info:doi/&rft_dat=%3Cproquest%3E2379751971%3C/proquest%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-p607-275a34eac8bdb66196509d654e52c90757addf152f2c309f04112a4abd2644cf3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=872842124&rft_id=info:pmid/&rfr_iscdi=true