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, May.
    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. 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.
    4. 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.
    5. Arndt Christiansen and Wolfgang Kerber & Wolfgang Kerber, 2006. "Competition Policy with Optimally Differentiated Rules Instead of "Per se Rules vs. Rule of Reason"," Marburg Working Papers on Economics 200606, Philipps-Universität Marburg, Faculty of Business Administration and Economics, Department of Economics (Volkswirtschaftliche Abteilung).
    6. 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.
    7. 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.
    8. Bruce H. Kobayashi, 2010. "The Law and Economics of Predatory Pricing," Chapters,in: Antitrust Law and Economics, chapter 6 Edward Elgar Publishing.
    9. Sam Peltzman, 2001. "The Decline of Antitrust Enforcement," Review of Industrial Organization, Springer;The Industrial Organization Society, vol. 19(1), pages 49-53, August.
    10. 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)

    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.

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

    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 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.

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

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.