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
Michigan Loses Antitrust Case Accusing Oil Giants of Blocking Renewable Energy
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
EU Antitrust Chief Says European SpaceX Challenger Will Face Full Merger Scrutiny
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
Canada Competition Bureau, Empire Settle Grocery Property-Control Probe
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
DoorDash $131.5 Million Settlement Puts New Focus on Gig Economy Regulation
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
UN Chief Presses for Global AI Framework With Independent Oversight
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – National Security
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
National Security in U.S. Antitrust Enforcement: Toward a More Disciplined Framework
Sep 22, 2026 by
Rod Rosenstein & Timothy Finley
The Department of War’s M&A Review Guidance: What Companies in the Defense Industry Need to Know
Sep 22, 2026 by
Eric Stocking & Paul Ney
National Security, Resilience and the Boundaries of Merger Control
Sep 22, 2026 by
Beatriz Marques
National Security and Competition: Building Resilient Telecommunications Networks
Sep 22, 2026 by
Roslyn Layton