logo

Anti-Competitive Conduct by Companies

   

Added on  2019-09-25

3 Pages1131 Words153 Views
Ques1Ans1.(a)The members would terminate their solo careers and would agree to use Nod, rather than Winkin or Blinkin, as the producer for Rash records.Ans. This alternate is not the best alternative to be selected as it is a violation of the competition laws which seeks to promote market competition. According to the competition laws as under the antitrust laws, anti-competitiveconduct by companies need to be regulated. Here, by choosing this option, the three musicians of our case law namely, Alex, Geddy, and Neil are cutting the competition internationally as their solo performance records which are currently distributed by Echo Records, Hemispheres Records, and Syrinx Records in Canada, Europe, and the United States respectively will now, after choosing this option, would not be sold in all the three states. Thus, cutting the competition and also it promotes monopoly. Also, it violates Section 3 of the Clayton Actwhere merger that curbs competition is not allowed.(b)The rash would form and fund a new record company called 2112 Productions and use 2112 todistribute Rash's music.Ans. This option is the best option to be chosen as it does not infringe the right of ant person and also do not cut the competition as all the three musicians will be producing their solo records to be sold in different countries around the world and will now be producing combined records.(c)Echo, Hemispheres, and Syrinx would form a joint venture to distribute Rash's music. The jointventure would have rights in Rash albums, but each joint venture partner would retain the rights it already had in the respective members' solo works. Relative to (A), this proposal would allow the record labels to coordinate the release of new material with the distribution of material from each player's solo career. When a new Rash album was about to be released, the respective joint venture partners could hit the pause button on marketing and promotion of solo works.Ans. This option is good but not the best as though it is not cutting the competition and also does not infringe the right to intellectual property of all the three musicians, still it somewhere creates the situation of monopoly in the market for the three partners to the joint venture will have the right to pause button on promotion of solo works thereby hindering free competition.(d)Echo, Hemispheres, and Syrinx would form a new corporation, which they own in equal shares, to distribute Rash's music. Each record company would assign its rights in the members' solo works to this company. This proposal would allow for coordination of the release of new material, as in (B), and also would allow for the release of new albums that mixed solo material with a new Rash material.Ans. No, this is also not a suitable option to be selected in terms of antitrust laws as through this all the three record companies are thereby creating a situation of monopoly as they are all giving their individual rights to the solo performance of the three musicians and thereby cutting the competitionand promoting monopoly.

End of preview

Want to access all the pages? Upload your documents or become a member.

Related Documents
Challenges to Whole Foods' Policies and Antitrust Law
|3
|1286
|192