• Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

This case study will examine the regulatory failure of antitrust laws in relation to the prosecution of IBM corporations

Extracts from this document...


Introduction: The power of the government to regulate or prevent any form of white collar crimes is very limited. This is especially true of criminal act such as antitrust violations. This case study will examine the regulatory failure of antitrust laws in relation to the prosecution of IBM corporations. The ambiguity of Section 2 of the Sherman Act can be seen to contribute to the failure to criminally prosecute any corporations for such violations. Regulatory failure in brief: Allegations of violations of antitrust laws by IBM are still presently presented before the courts but they have never been criminal charged with any criminal violations (Fisse 1983: 197). This is just some examples of the failure of regulations in antitrust laws that has failed to prosecute or criminally charged larger corporations with non compliancy associated with the antitrust laws. This can be contributed to the wider definition of antitrust laws and the difficulty in proving such violations have occurred. This is clearly evident in the Section 2 of the Sherman Act, which emphasize the need to provide prove for "monopolization" and the intent. The courts have traditionally given these regulations broad definitions in defining what has been violated (Bequai 1979: 96). ...read more.


The U.S. antitrust law implies that "monopolization" under Section 2 of Sherman Act is illegal if offender took anti-competitive actions to acquire, preserve or enhance its monopoly. For "monopolization" plaintiff have to prove that the defendant 1. Processed market power 2. Wilfully acquired or maintained this monopoly power as distinguished from acquisition through superior product, business acumen, or historical accident (Bequai 1979: 97). This also raises problems in determining what amount constituted requisite monopolistic power. It is believe that company that has control over 90 percent of the market can be said to have monopolistic power over the sector's economy. In some cases U.S. Supreme Court held that 60 percent control is sufficient, while other courts believe that 75 percent is enough (Bequai 1979: 97). Much of this determination depends on the facts of the case, the market itself, and the product involved (Bequai 1979: 97). For "monopolization" to be illegal under U.S. antitrust law, it is not sufficient enough for a company to "monopolize" a market by possessing large portion of the shares (enough if is 100 percent).Violations of Section 2 of the Sherman Act requires evidences showing that the means employed, if successful would have been sufficient to bring about monopoly control. ...read more.


Another factor which contributed to the failure of prosecuting violators is the decision to hand over jurisdiction of antitrust matters to the Attorney General to purse through the means of the courts and common laws. The courts is knowingly to exhibited several character tics that will contribute to the failure of these regulations. The courts have the ability to discriminate among particular cases, the pluralistic mode of reasoning, and the tendency toward incremental, and the adversary system. These characteristics permit the assertion of the principle of public control while minimizing the violence that control would do to the principle of private decision making in the economic sector (Jamieson 1994: 29-30). Corporations may use political power to ensure favourable antitrust legislation or positive decision by regulatory agencies (Jamieson 1994: 36).Clearly in the case against IBM, the Attorney General lawyer William F. Baxter has the final said in relation to this case. Conclusion: The Section 2 of the Sherman Act failed to stop or prevent larger corporations such as IBM from attempting to monopolize the sector. Even after all the antitrust lawsuits made by private entities and the government against IBM, this has not affected the profit of IBM products as it still remains one of the largest computer corporations today. The failure to criminally prosecute such violations has contributed to this continuing success of IBM. ...read more.

The above preview is unformatted text

This student written piece of work is one of many that can be found in our AS and A Level Markets & Managing the Economy section.

Found what you're looking for?

  • Start learning 29% faster today
  • 150,000+ documents available
  • Just £6.99 a month

Not the one? Search for your essay title...
  • Join over 1.2 million students every month
  • Accelerate your learning by 29%
  • Unlimited access from just £6.99 per month

See related essaysSee related essays

Related AS and A Level Markets & Managing the Economy essays

  1. Explain why environmental pollution is regarded as a source of market failure? Evaluate three ...

    Another issue that has to be taken into consideration is the rate of tax. Some big firms may not take much notice of the tax if it is negligible. The diagram on the next page shows the effect of taxes are shown on the diagram below: From the diagram one

  2. 'Although corporate pricing decisions are influenced by many different factors, fundamentally prices will reflect ...

    This modern phenomenon is justified to some extent by a relatively new model of competition. This model is called the theory of contestable markets. The hypothesis suggests that when there are a few firms in the industry they are

  1. Communism - A Failed Russian System

    The first Communist ruler of Soviet Union was Vladimir Ilyich Lenin in 1917. The moment Lenin stepped into power, he knew what he wanted. All along, ever since the start, Lenin had wanted a Proletariat Revolution, which had been achieved, and then a Dictatorship of the Proletariat, in which he would be on their behalf.

  2. To what extent do you consider monopolies to be in the public interest?

    When an idealised contestable market exists, the number of firms participating in the industry is irrelevant; firms, even monopolistic ones, are forced to act almost like they were in a perfectly competitive environment. The one major flaw with this argument is that a contestable market, regardless of the number of

  1. What is a Monopoly?

    Consequently they maintain a high market power. Absolute Cost Advantages (ACA) Firms may lower, perhaps through experience of being in the market for some time, which allows existing monopolists to cut prices and win price wars. Advertising and Marketing Developing consumer loyalty by establishing branded products can make successful entry

  2. Monopoly. The following is going to discuss that monopoly is always against the ...

    Firm is a price maker even though the increase of price will still lead to the reduction of quantity demand. It is illustrated by figure2: As the same as perfect competition, in the short-run monopolist can maximise the profit where MR=MC.

  1. What are the origins of the Pension Crisis and what can be done to ...

    Funded Schemes In a funded scheme, individuals save money for their retirement by giving it to a pension provider who then invests the accumulated funds in financial assets such as equities and bonds. When an individual retires they use the fund that they have built up to buy an annuity

  2. Economy and how it affects my business selling tables

    If the Euro was to be stronger than the pound, say for example for every 1 pound you could get 0.69 Euros. This would mean that for every pound you could get less Euros. So you would have to pay more for every Euro.

  • Over 160,000 pieces
    of student written work
  • Annotated by
    experienced teachers
  • Ideas and feedback to
    improve your own work