https://antitrustworldwiki.com/antitrustwiki/index.php?action=history&feed=atom&title=Talk%3AVietnam_%28July_1%2C_2005%29 2026-04-23T00:22:20Z Revision history for this page on the wiki MediaWiki 1.43.6 https://antitrustworldwiki.com/antitrustwiki/index.php?title=Talk:Vietnam_(July_1,_2005)&diff=1116&oldid=prev 2007-07-24T12:12:26Z

<p>New page: == Vietnam 2005 Tying == &#039;&#039;Does a prohibition against agreements imposing trading conditions on other parties count as a prohibition against tying?&#039;&#039; --<a href="/antitrustwiki/index.php?title=User:AchalOza" title="User:AchalOza">AchalOza</a> 14:51, ...</p> <p><b>New page</b></p><div>== Vietnam 2005 Tying ==<br /> <br /> &#039;&#039;Does a prohibition against agreements imposing trading conditions on other parties count as a prohibition against tying?&#039;&#039;<br /> <br /> --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 14:51, 19 July 2007 (EDT)<br /> <br /> Hylton: no, this is a prohibition against resale price maintenance. --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 20:28, 23 July 2007 (EDT)<br /> <br /> == Vietnam 2005 Dom. Efficiency Defense ==<br /> <br /> &#039;&#039;Would this imply any sort of efficiency defense?&#039;&#039;<br /> <br /> &quot;Several of these practices [by dominant firms] are not prohibited per se but<br /> are prohibited if they actually cause loss to consumers or<br /> have the intention of harming competition. However, no<br /> criteria or guidelines for assessing such effect or<br /> intentions are set out.&quot;<br /> <br /> --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 15:21, 19 July 2007 (EDT)<br /> <br /> Hylton: no, this is not a defense. For the purposes of this study, we are not differentiating between per se and rule of reasons tests. --[[User:AchalOza|AchalOza]] 13:48, 23 July 2007 (EDT)</div>

AchalOza