Nippon Paper Industries was found guilty in a U.S. court of conspiring with other Japanese companies to raise fax paper prices in the United States under the antitrust laws
What are the implications of such a law, and how does it affect international business?
Antitrust laws in the United States and other countries are designed to combat restrictive business practices and to encourage competition. Agencies such as the U.S. Federal Trade Commission, Japan's Fair Trade Commission, and the European Commission enforce antitrust laws. According to some legal experts, the pressures of global competition have resulted in an increased incidence of price-fixing and collusion among companies. The Sherman Act of 1890 prohibits certain restrictive business practices, including fixing prices, limiting production, allocating markets, or any other scheme designed to limit or avoid competition. The law applies to the activities of U.S. companies outside U.S. boundaries, as well as to foreign companies conducting business in the United States. Nippon Paper Industries was found guilty in a U.S. court of conspiring with other Japanese companies to raise fax paper prices in the United States. The Japanese government denounced the U.S. indictment as a violation of international law and Japan's sovereignty. A U.S. federal judge struck down the indictment, ruling that the Sherman Act does not apply to foreign conduct. However, a federal appeals court reversed the decision.
You might also like to view...
When a small business offers extended hours and home delivery at no additional cost after a large mass market retailer moves into their area, this business is reacting to changes in the ________ environment.
Fill in the blank(s) with correct word.
Notions Corporation holds a dominant position in the market because of its superior line of products. In fact, it now controls 90 percent of the product market within the relevant geographic market
Consumers are willing to pay more for Notions' products despite the fact that a few competitors offer similar products at substantially lower prices. If a competitor were to charge Notions with being a monopolist under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which of the following statements is true? A) The competitor's case would fail because a monopoly is defined as a firm having no competition. B) The competitor's case would fail unless it could show intent on the part of Notions to monopolize the market. C) The competitor's case would succeed because Notions controls 90 percent of the product market within the relevant geographic market. D) The competitor's case would succeed because Notions has attained both market power and overwhelming market share.