反托拉斯法規範掠奪行為之現在與未來--新經濟制度下之省思(3)_

:::

詳目顯示

第 1 筆 / 總合 1 筆

/1頁

來源文獻資料
摘要
外文摘要
引文資料

題名：	反托拉斯法規範掠奪行為之現在與未來--新經濟制度下之省思(3)
書刊名：	政大法學評論
作者：	陳志民
作者(外文)：	Chen, Andy C. M.
出版日期：	2004
卷期：	82
頁次：	頁225-294
主題關鍵詞：	新經濟；創新競爭；反托拉斯；公平交易法；掠奪；智慧財產權；獨占力濫用；相關市場；市場力量；關鍵設施理論；New economy；Innovation competition；Antitrust；Fair trade law；Predation；Intellectual property right；Abuse of monopoly power；Relevant markets；Market power；Essential facility doctrine
原始連結：	連回原系統網址
相關次數：	被引用次數:期刊(1) 博士論文(0) 專書(0) 專書論文(0) 排除自我引用:1 共同引用:6 點閱:108

　　　　　新經濟（new economy）制度的來臨，不僅對廠商的生產模式與競爭思維產生鉅大的改變，連帶的也對反托拉斯法（antitrust law）規範市場競爭秩序的功能產生前所未有的挑戰。論者紛紛從新經濟制度產業特色，如高固定╱低邊際成本、網路效果、資訊不對等、以及創新快速等面相出發，質疑傳統反托拉斯法原則已不足因應可能出現在以「知識」為主要生產投入，「智慧財產權」為主要產出的經濟環境中之不當競爭行為。本文以「市場掠奪」此一濫用獨占地位的行為為研究對象，從學理與比較法的觀點，探討類似觀點的正確性。歸納本文初步研究結論，新經濟制度對反接拉斯法的衝擊，固然難以避免，但此並不表示反托拉斯法或公平法一定要創立或引用新的執法原則。本文認為，明確定位反托拉斯法的規範目的，與運用學理重新闡釋既有的法原則與概念，傳統反托拉斯法架構應足以因應多數的新經濟市場掠奪行為。就研究結論對我國公平法的啟示而言，本文特別指出，在一片要求政府關切市場交易因網路效果或資訊不對等所產生之交易當事人談判地位懸殊的聲浪下，各國在運用反托拉斯或競爭法以規範「價格」或「非價格」掠奪行為時，似有漸趨「垂直化」的執法傾向，而忽略了行為的水平面效果評估。本文主張，不論是運用以效果面管制為主的「不當競爭」規定，或是行為面管制的「不公平競爭」規定來規範市場掠奪行為，水平市場競爭效果的評估，皆應被定位為門檻要件。忽略了此一基本原則，將使公平法在和其他法規就同一市場競爭行為出現規範競合時，產生在理論上無法調合的衝突。據此論點，本文進一步檢討我國公平會就相關議題所為之解釋與決議，以及所制定的相關「審理原則」的妥適性。

以文找文

　　　　　The advent of the "New Economy" system has drastically changed the ways goods are produced and competition is waged. The ability of antitrust law to regulate market competition has been challenged as well. Antitrust commentators-referring to various characteristics prevalent in the New Economy, including high fixed/low marginal costs, network effect and informational asymmetry-question the effectiveness of applying current antitrust doctrines to regulate anticompetitive activities in an economic system in which "knowledge" is commonly regarded as the major production input and "intellectual property rights" the principal desired output. They urge that new doctrines be introduced to allow antitrust to adapt to the needs of this system. This study evaluates the validity of this rather "apprehensive" view toward the consequences likely to arise from the interaction between antitrust law and the New Economy system. By investigating the applicability of current doctrines to arrangements suspected of having market predation effects, I attempt to show that however inevitable the impact of the system on antitrust law might be, it does not necessarily lead to the conclusion that the creation of new rules is required or even mandated. Most predatory arrangements in the New Economy could be properly confined within the scope of current antitrust law if enforcement agencies could adhere to the main legislative purpose of antitrust, i.e., protecting competition and not competitors, and making pertinent decisions and interpretations thereupon. More importantly, law enforcement agencies should avoid being misguided by the popular "lock-in" theory and devoting disproportionate enforcement resources to considering whether one party to a contract at issue has "vertically" used a stronger bargaining position to exploit another party. Instead, concern should primarily be placed upon the potential of the contract to create "horizontal" entry barriers. The analysis concludes by applying the policy implications suggested in this study to an examination of the relevant decisions and guidelines made by the Fair Trade Commission of Taiwan.

以文找文

期刊論文
1.	Salop, Steven C.、Scheffman, David T.(1983)。Raising Rivals' Costs。American Economic Review，73(2)，267-271。
2.	Merges, Robert P.(1994)。Comments: Of Property Rules, Coase, and Intellectual Property。Columbia Law Review，94，2655-2673。
3.	Coase, R. H.(1937)。The Problem of Social Cost。Journal of Law and Economics，3，1-44。
4.	Heller, Michael A.、Eisenberg, Rebecca S.。Can Patents Deter Innovation? The anticommons in Biomedical Research。Science，280，698。
5.	Rai, Arti K.(2001)。Fostering cumulative innovation in the biopharmaceutical industry: The role of patents and antitrust。Berkeley Technology Law Journal，16，813-853。
6.	Bums, M. R.(1986)。Predatory Pricing and the Acquisition Cost of Competitors。Journal of Political Economy，94，266-296。
7.	Jung, Y. J.、Kagel, J. H.、Levin, D.(1994)。On the Existence of Predatory Pricing: An Experimental Study of Reputation and Entry Deterrence in the Chain-Store Game。Rand Journal of Economics，25(1)，72-93。
8.	Aziz, Azam H.(1995)。Note: Defining Technology and Innovation Markets: The DOJ's Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property。Hofstra Law Review，24，475。
9.	Aghion, Phillipe、Bolton, Patrick(1987)。Contracts as Barriers to Entry。American Economics Review，77，388。
10.	Areeda, Phillip A.(1989)。Essential Facility: An Epithet in Need of Limiting Principles。Antitrust Law Journal，58，841。
11.	Baker, Jonathan B.(1994)。Predatory Pricing After Brooke Group: An Economic Perspective。Antitrust Law Journal，62(3)，585-603。
12.	Balto, David、Pitofsky, Robert(1998)。Antitrust and High-tech Industries: The New Challenge。Antitrust Bulletin，43，583。
13.	Barton, John H.(1997)。Patent and Antitrust: A Rethinking in Light of Patent Breadth and Sequential Innovation。Antitrust Law Journal，65，449。
14.	Baumol, William J.(1979)。Quasi-Permanence of Price Reduction: A Policy for Prevention of Predatory Pricing。Yale Law Journal，89，1。
15.	Baxter, William(1966)。Legal Restrictions on Exploitation of the Patent Monopoly: An Economic Analysis。Yale Law Journal，76，267。
16.	Benson, Joshua C.(2002)。Note: Resuscitating the Patent Utility Requirement, Again: A Return to Brenner v. Manson。U.C. Davis Law Review，36，267。
17.	Besen, Stanley M.、Manning, Willard G. Jr.、Mitchell, Bridger M.(1978)。Copyright Liability for Cable Television: Compulsory Licensing and the Coase Theorem。Journal of Economics，21，67。
18.	Bolton, Patrick、Broadly, Joseph F.、Riordan, Michael H.(2000)。Predatory Pricing: Strategic Theory and Legal Policy。Geogia Law Journal，88，2239。
19.	Brodley, Joseph F.、Ma, Ching-to Albert(199305)。Contract Penalties, Monopolizing Strategies, and Antitrust Policy。Standford Law Review，45，1161-1213。
20.	Cotter, Thomas F.(1999)。Intellectual Property and the Essential Facilities Doctrine。Antitrust Bulletin，44，211。
21.	Denger, Michael L.、Herfort, John A.(1994)。Predatory Pricing Claims After Brooke Group。Antitrust Law Journal，62(3)，541-558。
22.	Edlin, Aaron S.(2002)。Stopping Above-Cost Predatory Pricing。Yale Law Journal，111，941。
23.	Farrel, J.、Saloner, G.(1986)。Installed Base and Compatibality: Innovation, Product Preannouncements and Predation。American Economics Review，76，940。
24.	Fisher, Franklin M.、Rubinfeld, Daniel L.(2001)。U.S. v. Microsoft: An Economic Analysis。Antitrust Bulletin，46，1-69。
25.	Furse, Mark(1999)。United States v. Microsoft: High-tech Antitrust。International Review of Law, Computers and Technology，13，237。
26.	Hamilton, Clovia(2002)。Adequacy of the 1995 Antirast Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property in Complex High-Tech Markets。Comparative Law Review and Technology Journal，7，23。
27.	Gruber, Harold(1998)。Learning by Doing and Spillovers: Further Evidence for the Semiconductor Industry。Review of Industry Organization，13(6)，697-711。
28.	Hylton, Keith N.(1991)。Economic Rents and Essential Facilities。B. Y. U. Law Review，1991，1243。
29.	Kitch, Edmund W.(2000)。Elementary and Persistent Errors in the Economic Analysis of Intellectual Property。Vanderbit Law Review，53，1727。
30.	Klein, Benjamin(1993)。Market Power in Antitrust: Economic Analysis after Kodak。Supreme Court Economics Review，3，43。
31.	Levy, David T.、Reitzes, James D.(1993)。Product Differentiation and the Ability to Collude: Where Being Different Can Be an Advantage。Antitrust Bulletin，38(2)，349-368。
32.	McGee, John(1958)。Predatory Price Cutting: The Standard Oil (N.J.) Case。Journal of Law and Economics，1，137。
33.	Masten, S. E.、Snyder, E. A.(1993)。United States versus United Shoe Machinery Corporation: On the Merits。Journal of Law and Economics，36，33。
34.	Masten, S. E.、Snyder, E. A.(1989)。The Design and Duration of Contracts: Strategic and Efficiency Considerations。Law and Contemporary Problems，52，63。
35.	Merges, Robert P.(1996)。Contracting into Liability Rules: Intellectual Property Rights and Collective Rights Organizations。California Law Review，84(5)，1293-1393。
36.	Miller, Rich(20010510)。The New Economy Lives On。Business Week online。
37.	Opi, Sergio Baches(2001)。The Application of the Essential Facility Doctrine to Intellectual Property Licensing in the European Union and the United States: Are Intellectual Property Rights Still Sacrosanct?。Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal，11，409。
38.	Porter, Michael E.(2001)。Towards a Productivity-based Approach to Evaluating Mergers and Joint Ventures。Antitrust Bulletin，46，919。
39.	Posner, Richard A.(2001)。Antitrust in the New Economy。Antitrust Law Journal，68，925。
40.	Rogerson, William P.(1984)。Efficient Reliance and Damage Measures for Breach of Contract。Rand Journal of Economics，15，39-53。
41.	Rubinfeld, Daniel L.(1998)。Antitrust Enforcement in Dynamic Network Industries。Antitrust Bulletin，43，859。
42.	Saloner, Garth(1987)。Predation, Mergers, and Incomplete Information。Rand Journal of Economics，18，165。
43.	Salop, Steven C.、Romaine, R. Craig(1999)。Preserving Monopoly: Economic Analysis, Legal Standards, and Microsoft。George Mason Law Review，7，617。
44.	Silberman, Alan H.(1995)。The Myth of Franchise "Market Power"。Antitrust Law Journal，65，181。
45.	Sullivan, Lawrence A.(2001)。Is Competition Possible in High Tech Markets?: An Inquiry into Antitrust, Intellectual Property, and Broadband Regulation as Applied to "The New Economy"。Case Western Reserved Law Review，52，41。
46.	Tyson, Laura D'Andrea(20010430)。Why the New Economy is Here to Stay。Business Week Online。
47.	陳志民、莊春發(20000300)。論反托拉斯法對濫用市場地位行為之管制政策--以掠奪性訂價為分析中心。法政學報，10，313-366。延伸查詢
48.	陳志民(19990100)。接續性獨占，共謀理論，與「最高轉售價格維持」約定。法政學報，9，63-100。延伸查詢
49.	董安琪(20020500)。知識經濟與知識創業家。科學發展月刊，353，62-68。延伸查詢
50.	Areeda, Phillip A.、Turner, Donald F.(1975)。Predatory Pricing and Related Practices under Section 2 of the Sherman Act。Harvard Law Review，88(4)，697-733。
51.	Bain, J. S.(1949)。A Note on Pricing in Monopoly and Oligopoly。American Economics Review，39，448-464。
52.	Bayus, Barry L.、Jain, Sanjay、Rao, Ambar G.(2001)。Truth or Consequences: An Analysis of Vaporware and New Product Announcements。Journal of Marketing Research，38(1)，3-13。
53.	Cass, Ronald A.、Hylton, Keith N.(2001)。Antitrust Intent。South California Law Review，74，657。
54.	Easterbrook, Frank H.(1981)。Predatory Strategies and Counterstrategies。University of chicago Law Review，48(2)，263-337。
55.	Economides, Nicholas(2001)。United States v. Microsoft: A Failure of Antitrust in the New Economy。University of West Los Angeles Law Review，32，3。
56.	Heller, Michael A.(1998)。The Tragedy of the Anticommons: Property in the Transition from Marx to Markets。Harvard Law Review，111(3)，621-688。
57.	Irwin, Douglas A.、Klenow, Peter J.(1994)。Learning-by-doing Spillovers in the Semiconductor Industry。Journal of Political Economy，102(6)，1200-1227。
58.	Krattenmaker, Thomas G.、Salop, Steven C.(1986)。Anticompetitive Exclusion: Raising Rivals' Costs to Achieve Power over Price。Yale Law Journal，96(2)，209-293。
59.	Krattenmaker, Thomas G.、Salop, Steven C.(1986)。Competition and Cooperation in the Market for Exclusionary Rights。American Economics Review，76(2)，109-113。
60.	Lemley, Mark A.、McGowan, David(1998)。Legal Implications of Network Economic Effects。California Law Review，86(3)，479-611。
61.	Lipsky, Abbott B.、Sidak, J. Gregory(1999)。Essential Facility。Standford Law Review，51，1187。
62.	McGowan, David(1999)。Networks and Intention in Antitrust and Intellectual Property。Journal of Corporation Law，24，485。
63.	Pitofsky, Robert(2001)。Challenges of the New Economy: Issues at the Intersection of Antitrust and Intellectual Property。Antitrust Law Journal，68，913-925。
64.	Selten, Reinhard(1978)。The Chain Store Paradox。Theory and Decision，9(2)，127-159。
65.	Schmalensee, Richard(1978)。Entry deterrence in the ready-to-eat breakfast cereal industry。The Bell Journal of Economics，9(2)，305-327。
66.	Comanor, William S.、Freeh, H. E. III(1993)。Predatory Pricing and the Meaning of Intent。Antitrust Bulletin，38，293。
67.	Farrell, Joseph、Saloner, Garth(1985)。Standardization, Compatibility, and Innovation。Rand Journal of Economics，16(1)，70-83。
68.	Easterbrook, Frank H.(1984)。The Limits of Antitrust。Texas Law Review，63(1)，1-40。
69.	Economides, Nicholas(1996)。The Economics of Networks。International Journal of Industrial Organization，14(6)，673-699。
70.	Hardin, Garrett(1968)。The tragedy of the commons。Science，162(3859)，1243-1248。
71.	Calabresi, Guido、Melamed, A. Douglas(1972)。Property Rules, Liability Rules, and Inalienability: One View of the Cathedral。Harvard Law Review，85(6)，1089-1128。
72.	Williamson, Oliver E.(1977)。Predatory Pricing: A Strategic and Welfare Analysis。Yale law Journal，87(2)，284-340。

會議論文
1.	吳秀明(199911)。從依賴性理論探討相對市場優勢地位--以公平法立場之研析適用。第五屆競爭政策與公平交易法學術研討會。臺北市：行政院公平交易委員會。143-207。延伸查詢
2.	許志義(200206)。知識經濟體制下競爭政策面臨之挑戰及其因應方向。公平交易法施行十周年回嚴與前瞻學術研討會。行政院公平交易委員會。697-739。延伸查詢

研究報告
1.	Economides, Nicholas、Flyer, Frederick(1998)。Compatibility and Market Structure for Network Good。Stem School of Business, N.Y.U.。
2.	Evans, David S.、Schmalensee, Richard(200105)。Some Economic Aspects of Antitrust Analysis in Dynamically Competitive Industries。
3.	Neumark, David、Reed, Deborah(200204)。Employment Relationships in the New Economy。

學位論文
1.	陳丁章(2001)。一個遊走在法律、經濟與行銷間的精靈--掠奪性訂價初探(碩士論文)。國立政治大學。延伸查詢

圖書
1.	Areeda, P. A.、Turner, D.(1978)。Antitrust Law。Aspen Law & Business。
2.	Friedman, David D.(1990)。Price Theory: An Intermediate Text。OH：South-Weston Publishing Co.。
3.	Fisher, Franklin M.、McGowan, J.、Greenwood, J.(1983)。Folded, Spindled, and Mutilated: Economics Analysis of U.S. v. IBM。
4.	Hovenkamp, Herbert、Janis, Mark D.、Lemley, Mark A.(2002)。IP and Antiturst。
5.	Hovenkamp, Herbert(1994)。FEDERAL ANTITURST POLICY。
6.	Liebowtz, Stan J.、Margolis, Stephen(1999)。Winner, Loser and Microsoft: Competition and Antitrust in High Technology。
7.	Lott, John R.(1999)。Are Predatory Commitments Credible?--Who Should The Courts Believe?。
8.	Reid, R. H.(1997)。Architects of The Web: 1,000 Days That Built The Future of Business。
9.	Besanko, David、Dranove, David、Shanley, Mark(1996)。The Economics of Strategy。John Wiley & Sons。
10.	Polinsky, A. Mitchell(1989)。An Introduction to Law and Economics。Little Brown and Company。
11.	Shepherd, W. G.(1997)。The economics of industrial organization。Prentice-Hall, Inc.。

其他
1.	Badal, Robert G.，Ware, Hilary E.。U.S. Company Compelled to License Its Software by E.U. Antitrust Authorities: The Case of NDC Health v. IMS Health，http://www,hewm.com/use/articles/imshealth.pdf。
2.	Regalado, Antonio(20030505)。Scientists' Hunt for SARS Cure Turns to Race for Patent Rights。

圖書論文
1.	Milgrom, P.、Roberts, J.(1990)。New Theories of Predatory Pricing。Industrial Structure in the New Industrial Economics。Oxford：Oxford University Press。
2.	Areeda, Phillip A.(1991)。Monopolization, Mergers, and Markets: A Century Past and the Future。Collaboration Among COMPETITIORS。
3.	Delong, Bradford、Summers, Lawrence H.(2001)。The New Economy: Background, Historical Perspective, Questions, and Speculations。Economic Policy for the Information Economy。Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City。
4.	Sullivan, Lawrence A.、Jones, Anne I.(1992)。Monopoly Conduct, Especially Leveraging Power from One Product or Market to Another。Antitrust, Innovation, and Competitiveness。

推文
推薦
引用網址
引用嵌入語法
轉寄

top

:::

相關期刊
相關論文
相關專書
相關著作
熱門點閱

1.	區塊鏈在競爭法上之定位與適用問題
2.	行動支付系統競爭行為之分析及規範芻議
3.	我國法院判決對「足以影響生產、商品交易或服務供需之市場功能」要件之認知及其發展趨勢研析
4.	支付系統競爭議題及規範架構之建立
5.	市場界定、市場力量與智慧財產權授權--我國執法趨勢與挑戰
6.	由民營電廠案論聯合行為之認定
7.	事業市場力量之評估方法
8.	公平會智慧財產權授權管制實務之回顧與評析
9.	相關市場界定之論證要求--從行政法院相關裁判觀察
10.	從遊戲橘子併購案論事業結合之規範--以公平交易法為核心
11.	競爭法規範智慧財產權掠奪性訴訟之研究
12.	經濟分析適用於公平交易法之價值、例示與釋疑
13.	臺灣公平交易法與中國反壟斷法對於卡特爾規範之研究--違法構成要件之比較
14.	美國法對轉售價格維持的新發展--兼論公平交易法第18條的妥適性
15.	智慧財產權侵權警告函案件內容類型分析--以公平交易法為中心

1.	拒絕專利授權之研究—以美國反競爭規範為中心
2.	締約前資訊義務之研究
3.	限制轉售價格法制之研究

1.	解構智財法及其與競爭法的衝突與調和

無相關著作

無相關點閱

QR Code

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫系統

詳目顯示

臺灣人文及社會科學引文索引資料庫