论文部分内容阅读
本文从历史视野出发,考察了学术界和法官关于反垄断政策基本目标、实施效果等问题的争议,指出反垄断政策改革的八大方向包括:(1)三倍损害赔偿诉讼须减少;(2)间接买方规则应取消;(3)专家证词的技术方面问题不应由陪审团决定;(4)本身违法原则应被视作一种反垄断分析方法而非行为分类;(5)合理推定原则需要更多的结构分析;(6)最高法院应该否决柯达案;(7)《罗宾森—帕特曼法》应被废除;即使不能废除,法院也应该要求原告提供竞争损害的证据;(8)应该简化反垄断与规制之间的关系。
This article examines the controversy between academics and judges about the basic objectives of antitrust policy and the implementation effect of the antitrust policy. It points out that the eight directions of the antitrust policy reform include: (1) three times damages litigation should be reduced; (2) Indirect buyer rules should be abolished; (3) Technical aspects of expert testimony should not be determined by the jury; (4) The principle of per se illegality should be considered as an antitrust analysis rather than a behavioral classification; (5) The principle of rational presumption needs More structural analysis; (6) the Supreme Court should veto the Kodak case; (7) the Robinson-Partman Act should be repealed; and if not abolished, the court should require the plaintiff to provide evidence of competitive damage; (8) Simplify the relationship between antitrust and regulation.