Microsoft - GE - Honeywell - Tying - Legal point of view - Abuse of dominant position - Windows Media Player - Operating system - Concentration - Foreclosure of competitors - Packaged offers - Related market - Demand - Kodak - Rule of reason - Per se rule - ex-ante merger control - Degree of evidence - Justification - Injunctions - Remedy - Behavioral commitments

Tying after Microsoft and GE Honeywell

*This article is an automatic translation of the original article, provided here for your convenience. Read the original article. Laurence IDOT, Professor at the University of Paris I-Panthéon/Sorbonne [1] The examination of tying and bundling practices has been the subject of a particularly abundant economic literature for several years, but the Microsoft and GE/Honeywell cases have revived the debate. These decisions illustrate the new challenges faced by competition authorities and raise the question of whether the treatment of tying should not be revised. 1. At first glance, the subject leaves the jurist puzzled. Admittedly, there are many points in common in the cases proposed for his consideration. They are, in fact, two Commission decisions, which take place in the context of

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers

Already Subscribed? Sign-in

Access to this article is restricted to subscribers.

Read one article for free

Sign-up to read this article for free and discover our services.