SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : How high will Microsoft fly?
MSFT 484.87+0.2%3:55 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Insitu who wrote (47034)6/20/2000 12:40:00 PM
From: miraje  Read Replies (1) of 74651
 
Read the Alcoa Supreme Court case from the 1940's. The monopoly case law has been clear at least that long.

Re: Alcoa

heritage.org

...Past judicial decisions on antitrust issues only cloud the already foggy legal environment. For example, in a 1945 case, United States v. Aluminum Company of America (148 F.2d 416 (3rd Cir. 1945).) (Alcoa), an appeals court decision penalized a firm for being too competitive. Judge Learned Hand wrote in his opinion:

"[Alcoa] insists that it never excluded competitors; but we can think of no more effective exclusion than progressively to embrace each new opportunity as it opened and to face every newcomer with new capacity already geared into a great organization, having the advantage of experience, trade connections and elite of personnel." (148 F.2d 416 at 427.)

Thus Alcoa was punished not because it used illegal means to attempt to "monopolize" its industry, but because it used experience and aggressive business strategies to take advantage of market opportunities. This landmark decision has been the basis of many other court decisions and its perverse view of efficiency has held back many firms.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext