论文部分内容阅读
在众多的美国企业并购诉讼中,甲骨文并购仁科案是最新的典型案件。在该案的诉讼过程中,原告美国司法部和被告甲骨文公司都举出了大量证据,力图满足经济分析的要求,以证明己方主张的成立。最终法院判决原告美国司法部败诉,表明美国司法部的举证没有得到法院的认同。该案中涉及的相关市场界定、反竞争效果的分析等企业并购重大问题的分析与判断,能够给世界其他国家带来很多的启发,这不仅体现在传统产业的反垄断实践方面,更能反映在IT产业的反垄断实践中。
Among the many U.S. mergers and acquisitions litigation, Oracle mergers and acquisitions case is the latest case of Renke. In the course of the case, both the plaintiffs Justice Department and the defendant, Oracle Corporation, cite a great deal of evidence in an attempt to meet the requirements of economic analysis in order to prove the establishment of one’s own opinions. The final court ruled that the defendant, the U.S. Department of Justice, lost the case, indicating that the evidence given by the U.S. Department of Justice has not been approved by the court. The analysis and judgment on the major issues of mergers and acquisitions, such as the definition of the relevant market, the analysis of anticompetitive effects involved in the case, can bring a lot of inspiration to other countries in the world. This not only reflects the anti-monopoly practice of traditional industries but also reflects the In the antitrust practice of IT industry.