Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home
Hostname: page-component-99c86f546-pkshj Total loading time: 0.274 Render date: 2021-12-05T07:18:55.901Z Has data issue: true Feature Flags: { "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "figures": true, "newCiteModal": false, "newCitedByModal": true, "newEcommerce": true, "newUsageEvents": true }

8 - Facilitating Mechanisms

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 November 2009

Keith N. Hylton
Affiliation:
Boston University
Get access

Summary

Facilitating mechanisms make collusion more effective by serving one or more of the following functions: establishing a method of monitoring compliance, enabling parties to enforce compliance, and hiding collusion from public view. The important cases have dealt with data dissemination plans.

The central doctrinal issue is whether per se or rule of reason analysis applies to facilitating mechanisms, such as data dissemination plans. Start with the basic proposition from Socony that price fixing is per se illegal. It follows that a data dissemination plan violates Section 1 if it is a necessary and sufficient element of a price-fixing plan. In general, however, the link between the dissemination plan and the price-fixing charge presents a difficult question. A data dissemination plan may facilitate collusion, or it may facilitate other less harmful or even beneficial ends. In addition, there will not be clear evidence in these cases of an agreement on prices, for otherwise the existence of a data dissemination plan would be irrelevant. The plaintiff therefore must prove, more or less, that the dissemination plan was a sufficient element of a price-fixing conspiracy, so that it would be appropriate for a court to infer conspiracy from the existence and operation of the plan.

Per se and rule of reason tests require different standards of proof when applied to facilitating mechanisms. A per-se rule dispenses with the plaintiff's burden of establishing the inference of a conspiracy to restrain trade.

Type
Chapter
Information
Antitrust Law
Economic Theory and Common Law Evolution
, pp. 144 - 165
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2003

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Send book to Kindle

To send this book to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Send book to Dropbox

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Send book to Google Drive

To send content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×