Kelyn Bacon, Apr 24, 2008
In the tying part of the Microsoft case, as in the interoperability part of the case, the CFI upheld the Commission´s Decision. But it did so on grounds that were confused and inconsistent. For all of the central elements of the case, the CFI appears to have been unable or unwilling to set out a clear statement of principle and apply it properly to the facts. The judgment also sets the CFI in direct conflict with the more economic approach being developed by the Commission in its assessment of Article 82 cases. The only clear signal provided by the CFI in this case is that it will not engage in a reform of Article 82 policy. Fortunately, this does not prevent the Commission from doing so; indeed, the legal uncertainty resulting from this judgment makes clear guidance from the Commission all the more imperative.
Featured News
Compass Faces New Federal Antitrust Fight Over Private Home Listings
Oct 22, 2026 by
CPI
Deutsche Boerse’s $6 Billion Allfunds Deal Faces EU Decision by Nov. 27
Oct 22, 2026 by
CPI
German Court Orders MAN, Daimler Truck to Compensate Customers in Price-Fixing Case
Oct 22, 2026 by
CPI
FTC Brings Antitrust Enforcement to Dallas
Oct 22, 2026 by
CPI
Publishers Urge EU, UK Regulators to Block Meta’s New Terms
Oct 22, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – EU Merger Guidelines
Oct 19, 2026 by
CPI
In Praise of Theories of Benefits
Oct 19, 2026 by
Cyril Hariton & Pierre Regibeau
Closing the Efficiencies Gap
Oct 19, 2026 by
Kasia Czapracka & Marika Harjula
Analysis of Dynamic Trade-Offs Under the New Guidelines: Would Cases Like Amazon/Irobot Turn Out Differently?
Oct 19, 2026 by
Oliver Latham, Sam Marden, Saul Mendelsohn & Serge Moresi
Exploitative Portfolio Effects In EU Merger Control: From Mars/Kellanova to the Draft Merger Guidelines
Oct 19, 2026 by
Niels Baeten, Danette Chan & Elizabeth Malik