If Polaroid wanted damages against Kodak for infringing on its instant development film process, and the courts found a high positive cross elasticity between purchases of Polaroid instant film and 35mm regular film, would that have strengthened or weakened Polaroid's claim against Kodak?
A large positive cross elasticity showed a strong substitute relationship, so that Polaroid was losing sales not only to Kodak instant film but also to 35mm film in general. Hence, it could not claim all lost sales were due to Kodak's infringement, which reduced the damages it could claim.
You might also like to view...
"The fewer the number of substitutes for a product, the more elastic the demand for that product." Is the previous statement true or false?
What will be an ideal response?
New Keynesian economists generally argue that
A) there is an exploitable tradeoff between unemployment and inflation. B) changes in aggregate demand will have relatively greater effects on real GDP when firms change prices less frequently. C) activist policy can be used to reduce the fluctuations in real GDP. D) all of the above