Bundling and Tying: Should Regulators Use the Per Se Approach or the Rule-of-Reason Approach? Lessons from the Economics Literature
Sonia Di Giannatale, Alexander Elbittar, Dec 20, 2012
A firm that practices tying in the United States can be committing a per se violation of the an- titrust law, and it can be also considered a per se violation of the Article 102 of the EC Treaty. However, there is evidence for the use of the rule-of-reason approach in some courts’ decisions in tying cases, such as United States vs. Microsoft in 2001 and the case against Microsoft in the EC in 2004. Therefore, the question of when a tying case should be ruled under the per se approach or under the rule-of-reason approach is valid and has policy implications. This article is written to shed light into what could be the appropriate answer by presenting several lessons that we can learn from the economics literature.
Featured News
Carey Bolsters Competition Law Team With New Senior Counsel
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
TikTok US Sale Could Deliver $10 Billion Windfall to the United States
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
States Press Ahead With Live Nation Antitrust Trial After Federal Settlement
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
US Pulls Back Draft Regulation Targeting Global AI Chip Shipments
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
Selecta and Bondholders Ask US Court to Dismiss Antitrust Lawsuit Over Creditor Pact
Mar 15, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Behavioral Economics
Feb 22, 2026 by
CPI
Behavioral Antitrust in 2026
Feb 22, 2026 by
Maurice Stucke
Behavioral Economics in Competition Policy: Going Beyond Inertia and Framing Effects
Feb 22, 2026 by
Annemieke Tuinstra & Richard May
Agreeing to Disagree in Antitrust
Feb 22, 2026 by
Jorge Padilla
Recognizing What’s Around the Corner: Merger Control, Capabilities, and the New Nature of Potential Competition
Feb 22, 2026 by
Magdalena Kuyterink & David J. Teece