期刊文献+

对索尼可充电电池垄断案的分析

Analysis of the Monopoly Case of Sony Lithium Battery
下载PDF
导出
摘要 2004年年底发生了四川德先科技状告索尼搭售可充电锂电池的案件,由于我国反垄断法律规定的不完善,很多学者认为该案中的原告德先前途黯淡。笔者承认我国反不正当竞争法关于禁止搭售规定模糊、适用性不强,所以主要从一般关于搭售的理论出发分析索尼的搭售行为,法律上的正义得不到伸张,但是理还是可以论的。 In the end of 2004, it occurred a case that the Sichuan Dexian Science and Technology company bought an action against Sony making tying arrangement of the lithium battery. Because our country's antimonopoly law was not perfect, many scholars thought that Dexian's future was dim in the above-mentioned case. The author acknowledges that, our country's law against unfair competition has no definite stipulation about prohibiting tying arrangement and are not applicable, therefore, mainly analyzing the behavior from the theory, the legal justice cannot be fulfilled, but it is still likely to discuss its principle.
作者 毛晓磊
机构地区 华东政法学院
出处 《安徽警官职业学院学报》 2006年第4期26-28,共3页 Journal of Anhui Vocational College of Police Officers
关键词 搭售 独立产品 支配力量 竞争 tying arrangement independent product dominant power competition
  • 相关文献

参考文献2

二级参考文献15

  • 1沈敏荣.反垄断法的性质[J].中国法学,1998(4):74-80. 被引量:24
  • 2[美]丹尼斯·卡尔顿 杰弗里·佩罗夫.《现代产业组织》[M].上海三联书店、上海人民出版社,1998..
  • 3[美]马歇尔·C·霍华德著.《美国反托拉斯法与贸易法规》[M].中国社会科学出版社,1991年版.第34页.
  • 4Ernest Gelihom, Antitrust Law and Economics (third edition), West Publishing Co. 1986, P. 315.
  • 5颜廷栋.《论垂直性交易限制在竞争法上之规范》[J].公平交易法季刊,.
  • 6Thomas D. Morgan, Cases and Meterials on Modem Antitrust Law and Its origins, West Publishing Co.1994, P359.
  • 7See Standard Oil Company of Califomia V. United States, Supreme Court of the United States, 1949.
  • 8See International Salt Co. V. United States, Supreme Court of the United States, 1947.
  • 9刘静怡.《初探网路产业的市场规范及其未来:以United States V.Microsoft案的发展为主轴》[J].《台大法学论丛》,(4).
  • 10John H. Shenefidd And JRwin M. Stelzer, The Antitrust Laws, The AEI Press, 1993,P70.

共引文献33

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部