TY - JOUR
T1 - Analyzing China's Guiding Case No. 79 Under Section 1 of Sherman Act - A Per Se Tying Violation or Not?
AU - Lai, Sinchit
N1 - Information for this record is provided by the author(s) concerned.
PY - 2018
Y1 - 2018
N2 - In China’s Guiding Case No. 79, Wu Xiaoqin v. Shaanxi BC & TV Network (Group) Co., Ltd., the Supreme People’s Court of China held that Defendant BC & TV Network engaged in tie-in sales, tying basic TV programs to paid TV programs, and thus violated article 17.1.5 of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law. This Comment analyzes this case under Section 1 of the U.S. Sherman Act and shows how a U.S. court might analyze it differently. After analyzing each element required for a tying agreement, this Comment concludes that a U.S. court is unlikely to hold that the alleged tying arrangement is a per se violation of the federal antitrust law.
AB - In China’s Guiding Case No. 79, Wu Xiaoqin v. Shaanxi BC & TV Network (Group) Co., Ltd., the Supreme People’s Court of China held that Defendant BC & TV Network engaged in tie-in sales, tying basic TV programs to paid TV programs, and thus violated article 17.1.5 of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law. This Comment analyzes this case under Section 1 of the U.S. Sherman Act and shows how a U.S. court might analyze it differently. After analyzing each element required for a tying agreement, this Comment concludes that a U.S. court is unlikely to hold that the alleged tying arrangement is a per se violation of the federal antitrust law.
UR - https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=3152693
UR - https://web.archive.org/web/20180503010249/http://pennjil.com/category/publications/online-publications/
UR - https://web.archive.org/web/20180722211543/http:/pennjil.com/analyzing-chinas-guiding-case-no-79-under-section-1-of-sherman-act-a-per-se-violation-or-not/
M3 - RGC 21 - Publication in refereed journal
JO - University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law Online
JF - University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law Online
ER -