Are Article 82 EC and Intellectual Property Interoperable? The State of the Law Pending the Judgment in Microsoft v. Commission
Maurits Dolmans, Paul-John Loewenthal, Robert O’Donoghue, Apr 19, 2007
The objectives of intellectual property rights (IPR) and competition law are essentially the same: both promote innovation to the benefit of consumers. IPRs are, however blunt instruments that strike the right balance in general, but in exceptional individual situations may not achieve (and may sometimes even obstruct) the innovation policy goal. Competition law is a useful tool to redress the balance in these situations, and the European Commission and EC courts have recognized that in exceptional cases the exercise of IPRs may infringe competition law. This article examines the extent to which Article 82 EC restricts the use of IPRs, pending the judgment of the CFI in Case T-201/04, Microsoft v. Commission.
Featured News
Apple Eases EU Tracking Rules After Antitrust Scrutiny
Sep 17, 2026 by
CPI
FTC Moves to Restrict Beretta’s Board Influence in Ruger Investment
Sep 17, 2026 by
CPI
Justice Department Open to Talks With AI Labs on Safety Coordination
Sep 17, 2026 by
CPI
DOJ Signals AI Safety Cooperation May Avoid Antitrust Hurdles
Sep 17, 2026 by
CPI
Hogan Lovells Cadwalader Adds Skadden Antitrust Partner in Brussels Push
Sep 17, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Computational Antitrust
Sep 16, 2026 by
CPI
The Next Five Years of Computational Antitrust
Sep 16, 2026 by
Thibault Schrepel
When Two AI Agents Talk: A Gap in Detection Capabilities
Sep 16, 2026 by
Alba Ribera Martinez
When Innovation Competition Has No Product Yet: Making General Innovation Competition Operational
Sep 16, 2026 by
Mariateresa Maggiolino
Computational Antitrust for Complex Adaptive Markets
Sep 16, 2026 by
Filip Lubinski