Here is the synopsis of our sample research paper on Antitrust in the US and Japan. Have the paper e-mailed to you 24/7/365.
Essay / Research Paper Abstract
This 6 page paper contrasts US and Japanese antitrust and antimonopoly law, using recent cases, examining why monopoly positions are bad for the consumers. The paper includes the Toshiba Elevators, the Microsoft case and the case of Image Technical Services v. Kodak. The bibliography cites 6 sources.
Page Count:
6 pages (~225 words per page)
File: TS14_TEantitr.rtf
Buy This Term Paper »
Unformatted sample text from the term paper:
same level of antitrust legislation and regulation cannot be seen in all countries, Indeed it, has been a point of contention between the US and Japan, who are major trading
partners. The approach may be seen as the different approach which is taken towards the economy, with the US being more driven to ensure there are no monopolies left and
that competition is promoted whereas Japan has a more protectionist policy. However, we can also argue that the level of enforcement in Japan has been increasing (Rosenthall, 1995). There
have even been some examples of the antitrust laws being more stringently enforced than in the US. An example case is that of the case where a small company was
supplying services to the Toshiba Elevators, a subsidiary of Toshiba (Rosenthall, 1995). The accusation was that the company was seeking to monopolise the after sales sector of the market
and their ability to supply parts for the maintenance of the elevators (Rosenthall, 1995). In this case the company cited an American case; that of Image Technical Services
v. Kodak which was a case heard in the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals in the United States (Rosenthall, 1995). The defendant had asked the court to dismiss the case,
but the citing of the US case was key in influence a denial of that motion at the Osaka court (Rosenthall, 1995). This was a good example of US
law were it was deemed that the equipment and the after sales market may be seen as separate markets, and as such it was possible for monopolisation to take
place, with respect this decision the court awarded $67,000,000 to Image Technical Services (Rosenthall, 1995). This may indicate that there is some agreement and conformity between the spirit
...