排他性交易中经营者要求的形式与模式:理性法则研究

Anna Maria Tri Anggraini, A. Sabirin, Yoel Nixon A Rumahorbo
{"title":"排他性交易中经营者要求的形式与模式:理性法则研究","authors":"Anna Maria Tri Anggraini, A. Sabirin, Yoel Nixon A Rumahorbo","doi":"10.20961/yustisia.v12i2.73316","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Tying is usually defined as the dominant company selling one product since the buyer must also purchase a different product or agree not to purchase the bonded product from other suppliers. This paper analyzes requirements imposed by the reported business actor on other parties deemed to have violated the tying and bundling under competition law in Indonesia, the U.S., and the European Union. Also, it discusses the application of the Rule of Reason by the competition commission in these three region. This study uses a comparative law approach. The results of the analysis show that a tying agreement is an agreement that requires the recipient of the supply to buy other products that are not necessarily needed. Usually, these agreements are entered into by two affiliated companies or at least cooperating partners, one of which occupies a dominant position to prevent competitors from entering the relevant market. Not all tying agreements have a negative impact. Therefore, an impact analysis is needed through a rule of reason approach, especially in digital-based industries.","PeriodicalId":33244,"journal":{"name":"Yustisia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"The Form and Pattern of Business Actors Requirements in Exclusive Dealing: A Rule of Reason Approach\",\"authors\":\"Anna Maria Tri Anggraini, A. Sabirin, Yoel Nixon A Rumahorbo\",\"doi\":\"10.20961/yustisia.v12i2.73316\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Tying is usually defined as the dominant company selling one product since the buyer must also purchase a different product or agree not to purchase the bonded product from other suppliers. This paper analyzes requirements imposed by the reported business actor on other parties deemed to have violated the tying and bundling under competition law in Indonesia, the U.S., and the European Union. Also, it discusses the application of the Rule of Reason by the competition commission in these three region. This study uses a comparative law approach. The results of the analysis show that a tying agreement is an agreement that requires the recipient of the supply to buy other products that are not necessarily needed. Usually, these agreements are entered into by two affiliated companies or at least cooperating partners, one of which occupies a dominant position to prevent competitors from entering the relevant market. Not all tying agreements have a negative impact. Therefore, an impact analysis is needed through a rule of reason approach, especially in digital-based industries.\",\"PeriodicalId\":33244,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Yustisia\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Yustisia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v12i2.73316\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Yustisia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.20961/yustisia.v12i2.73316","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

捆绑通常被定义为销售一种产品的主导公司,因为买方还必须购买另一种产品或同意不从其他供应商购买保税产品。本文分析了被举报的商业行为人对被认为违反了印度尼西亚、美国和欧盟竞争法规定的搭售和捆绑行为的其他各方提出的要求。此外,还讨论了竞争委员会对理性规则在这三个地区的应用。本研究采用了比较法方法。分析结果表明,搭售协议是一种要求供应的接受者购买不一定需要的其他产品的协议。通常,这些协议是由两家附属公司或至少合作伙伴签订的,其中一家公司占据主导地位,以阻止竞争对手进入相关市场。并非所有搭售协议都会产生负面影响。因此,需要通过理性法则的方法进行影响分析,尤其是在基于数字的行业。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
The Form and Pattern of Business Actors Requirements in Exclusive Dealing: A Rule of Reason Approach
Tying is usually defined as the dominant company selling one product since the buyer must also purchase a different product or agree not to purchase the bonded product from other suppliers. This paper analyzes requirements imposed by the reported business actor on other parties deemed to have violated the tying and bundling under competition law in Indonesia, the U.S., and the European Union. Also, it discusses the application of the Rule of Reason by the competition commission in these three region. This study uses a comparative law approach. The results of the analysis show that a tying agreement is an agreement that requires the recipient of the supply to buy other products that are not necessarily needed. Usually, these agreements are entered into by two affiliated companies or at least cooperating partners, one of which occupies a dominant position to prevent competitors from entering the relevant market. Not all tying agreements have a negative impact. Therefore, an impact analysis is needed through a rule of reason approach, especially in digital-based industries.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
0.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
11
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信