IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/ksa/szemle/1217.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A dominanciaproblémák tényeinek értelmezése és a közgazdaság-tudományi módszertan
[Interpretation of the facts of dominance problems and the methodology of economics]

Author

Listed:
  • Török, Ádám

Abstract

A cikk a versenyszabályozás közgazdaságtanának egyik nagy gyakorlati jelentőségű területével, a dominanciaproblémák elemzésével kapcsolatban tekinti át a megfigyelt tények különböző, egymásnak akár ellentmondó, de egyaránt egzaktnak tekinthető interpretációs lehetőségeit. Elsősorban az amerikai versenyjogi gyakorlat egyik legutóbbi híres esete, a "böngészőügy" feldolgozásával próbálja megvilágítani a verseny tényei önmagában való (per se) és mérlegelés szerinti (rule of reason) értelmezésének közgazdasági hátterét. A tanulmány a dominanciaügyek értékelésének módszertanával kapcsolatos megjegyzésekkel zárul. Journal of Economic Literature (JEL) kód: B40, K21, L41.

Suggested Citation

  • Török, Ádám, 2011. "A dominanciaproblémák tényeinek értelmezése és a közgazdaság-tudományi módszertan [Interpretation of the facts of dominance problems and the methodology of economics]," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(1), pages 41-55.
    • Handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:1217
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.kszemle.hu/tartalom/letoltes.php?id=1217
    Download Restriction: Registration and subscription. 3-month embargo period to non-subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Motta,Massimo, 2004. "Competition Policy," Cambridge Books, Cambridge University Press, number 9780521016919.
    2. Baumol, William J, 1982. "Contestable Markets: An Uprising in the Theory of Industry Structure," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 72(1), pages 1-15, March.
    3. Arndt Christiansen & Wolfgang Kerber, 2006. "Competition Policy With Optimally Differentiated Rules Instead Of “Per Se Rules Vs Rule Of Reason”," Journal of Competition Law and Economics, Oxford University Press, vol. 2(2), pages 215-244.
    4. Baumol, William J, 1996. "Predation and the Logic of the Average Variable Cost Test," Journal of Law and Economics, University of Chicago Press, vol. 39(1), pages 49-72, April.
    5. Benjamin Klein, 2001. "The Microsoft Case: What Can a Dominant Firm Do to Defend Its Market Position?," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 45-62, Spring.
    6. Michael D. Whinston, 2001. "Exclusivity and Tying in U.S. v. Microsoft: What We Know, and Don't Know," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 15(2), pages 63-80, Spring.
    7. Stephen H. Sosnick, 1958. "A Critique of Concepts of Workable Competition," The Quarterly Journal of Economics, President and Fellows of Harvard College, vol. 72(3), pages 380-423.
    8. William E. Kovacic & Carl Shapiro, 2000. "Antitrust Policy: A Century of Economic and Legal Thinking," Journal of Economic Perspectives, American Economic Association, vol. 14(1), pages 43-60, Winter.
    9. Bara, Zoltán, 2007. "A közgazdasági elemzés szerepe a kiszorító/felfaló árazás vizsgálatában. Az Európa Bíróság France Télécom-ügyben hozott ítéletének hatásai [The role of economic analysis in predatory pricing cases.," Közgazdasági Szemle (Economic Review - monthly of the Hungarian Academy of Sciences), Közgazdasági Szemle Alapítvány (Economic Review Foundation), vol. 0(9), pages 800-820.
    10. Bruce H. Kobayashi, 2010. "The Law and Economics of Predatory Pricing," Chapters, in: Keith N. Hylton (ed.), Antitrust Law and Economics, chapter 6, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    11. Sam Peltzman, 2001. "The Decline of Antitrust Enforcement," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(1), pages 49-53, August.
    12. Posner, Richard A, 1987. "The Law and Economics Movement," American Economic Review, American Economic Association, vol. 77(2), pages 1-13, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Nicola Giocoli, 2013. "Games judges don't play: predatory pricing and strategic reasoning in US antitrust," Supreme Court Economic Review, University of Chicago Press, vol. 21(1), pages 271-330.
    2. Oliver Budzinski, 2009. "Modern Industrial Economics and Competition Policy: Open Problems and Possible Limits," Working Papers 93/09, University of Southern Denmark, Department of Sociology, Environmental and Business Economics.
    3. Zigic, Kresimir & Maçi, Ilir, 2011. "Competition policy and market leaders," Economic Modelling, Elsevier, vol. 28(3), pages 1042-1049, May.
    4. Kresimir Zigic, 2011. "Strategic Interactions in Markets with Innovative Activity: The Cases of Strategic Trade Policy and Market Leadership," CERGE-EI Books, The Center for Economic Research and Graduate Education - Economics Institute, Prague, edition 1, number b06, May.
    5. Boone, Jan, 2004. "Balance of Power," CEPR Discussion Papers 4733, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    6. Centner, Terence J. & Wetzstein, Michael E., 1984. "Cooperative Antitrust Monopolization and the Theory of Contestable Markets," Journal of Agricultural and Applied Economics, Cambridge University Press, vol. 16(1), pages 129-136, July.
    7. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Ulph, David, 2014. "Legal Uncertainty, Competition Law Enforcement Procedures and Optimal Penalties," 2007 Annual Meeting, July 29-August 1, 2007, Portland, Oregon TN 2015-12, American Agricultural Economics Association (New Name 2008: Agricultural and Applied Economics Association).
    8. Motta, Massimo & Persson, Lars & Fumagalli, Chiara, 2005. "Exclusive Dealing, Entry and Mergers," CEPR Discussion Papers 4902, C.E.P.R. Discussion Papers.
    9. Michiel Bijlsma & Viktoria Kocsis & Victoria Shestalova & Gijsbert Zwart, 2008. "Vertical foreclosure: a policy framework," CPB Document 157, CPB Netherlands Bureau for Economic Policy Analysis.
    10. Litan, Robert E. & Shapiro, Carl, 2001. "Antitrust Policy During the Clinton Administration," Competition Policy Center, Working Paper Series qt45r5r72p, Competition Policy Center, Institute for Business and Economic Research, UC Berkeley.
    11. Katsoulacos, Yannis & Ulph, David, 2014. "Legal Uncertainty, Competition Law Enforcement Procedures and Optimal Penalties," SIRE Discussion Papers 2015-12, Scottish Institute for Research in Economics (SIRE).
    12. Marie-Laure Allain & Marcel Boyer & Jean-Pierre Ponssard & Rachidi Kotchoni, 2011. "The Determination of Optimal Fines in Cartel Cases - The Myth of Underdeterrence," CIRANO Working Papers 2011s-34, CIRANO.
    13. Federico Etro, 2008. "Stackelberg Competition with Endogenous Entry," Economic Journal, Royal Economic Society, vol. 118(532), pages 1670-1697, October.
    14. Allain, Marie-Laure & Boyer, Marcel & Kotchoni, Rachidi & Ponssard, Jean-Pierre, 2015. "Are cartel fines optimal? Theory and evidence from the European Union," International Review of Law and Economics, Elsevier, vol. 42(C), pages 38-47.
    15. Pier Luigi Parcu, 2006. "European dominant position and american monopolization: a unifying approach from basic game theory," BNL Quarterly Review, Banca Nazionale del Lavoro, vol. 59(237), pages 171-192.
    16. Jhuma Mukhopadhyay & Indrani Chakraborty, 2017. "Competition and Industry Performance: A Panel VAR Analysis in Indian Manufacturing Sector," Journal of Quantitative Economics, Springer;The Indian Econometric Society (TIES), vol. 15(2), pages 343-366, June.
    17. Hüschelrath, Kai, 2008. "Is it Worth all the Trouble? The Costs and Benefits of Antitrust Enforcement," ZEW Discussion Papers 08-107, ZEW - Leibniz Centre for European Economic Research.
    18. Steven J. Davis & Jack MacCrisken & Kevin M. Murphy, 2001. "Economic Perspectives on Software Design: PC Operating Systems and Platforms," NBER Working Papers 8411, National Bureau of Economic Research, Inc.
    19. Kuroda, Toshifumi & Koguchi, Teppei & Ida, Takanori, 2019. "Identifying the effect of mobile operating systems on the mobile services market," Information Economics and Policy, Elsevier, vol. 46(C), pages 86-95.
    20. Henk Don & Ron Kemp & Jarig Sinderen, 2008. "Measuring the Economic Effects of Competition Law Enforcement," De Economist, Springer, vol. 156(4), pages 341-348, December.

    More about this item

    JEL classification:

    • B40 - Schools of Economic Thought and Methodology - - Economic Methodology - - - General
    • K21 - Law and Economics - - Regulation and Business Law - - - Antitrust Law
    • L41 - Industrial Organization - - Antitrust Issues and Policies - - - Monopolization; Horizontal Anticompetitive Practices

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:ksa:szemle:1217. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Odon Sok (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.kszemle.hu .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.