【一次資料集−Headline Before 2000


The application of Community competition law by the national courts - Mario MONTI [EC]

Europäische Rechtsakademie - "Towards the Application of Article 81(3) by National Courts" - Trier - 27.11.2000


Commission clears Vizzavi Internet portal venture between Vodafone, Vivendi and Canal+ subject to conditions [EC]


Commission approves the EBU-Eurovision system

adopted a decision that grants an exemption from normal antitrust law to the rules of the EBU governing the joint acquisition and sharing of broadcasting rights for sports events in the framework of the Eurovision system. The exemption is valid until 2005


Report from the Commission to the Council, the European Parliament and the Economic and Social Committee on the implementation and effects of directive 91/250/EEC on the legal protection of computer programs pdf [EC]


*2000-03 EC      

The Lisbon Strategy

An agenda of economic and social renewal for Europe – ‘the knowledge based society’ ‘enriching the European concept of public service’

Contribution of the European Commission to the Spring European Council (COM 2000/7)

Lisbon 23 - 24th March 2000



Pluralism in the Multi-Channel Market – Consultant’s Report to the Council of Europe, Directorate of Human Rights, Group of Specialists on Media Pluralism, MM-S-PL[99] 12 def 2. by Christopher T. Marsden pdf [EU]


Federal Trade Commission v. H.J.Heinz Co., 116 F.Supp. 2d 190 (D.D.C.2000), rev’d, 246 F.3d 708 (D.C.Cir.2001) [US DC Circuit Court]

creating a maverick


Stephen Byers blocks BSkyB/Manchester United Merger [DTI]


The concentration between Gencor and Lonrho is incompatible with the common market – Gencor case T-102/96 [EC]                             

cf. press release


Commission opens up the market for comprehensive weekly TV guides in Ireland and Northern Ireland - Magill case [EC]


Commission reaches preliminary agreement with British Interactive Broadcasting (BiB)



Case No IV/M.993 – Bertelsmann/Kirch/Premiere (1999-02-27 OJ L53/1) [EC]

Pluralism and competition policy


Notice on the application of the competition rules to access agreements in the telecommunications sector, OJ C 265, 22.8.1998 [EC]


Commission Notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposes of Community Competition Law, OJ [1997] C 372/5, [1998] 4 CMLR 177 [EC]


Case C-368/95, Vereinigte Familiapress Zeitungsverlags- und vertriebs GmbH v Heinrich Bauer Verlag, [1997] ECR I-3689 – Fundamental Rights

’promoting press diversity’ has to interpreted in the light of general principles and fundamental rights, including freedom of expression under Article 10 ECHR

---for now this case and ERT jurisprudence remains in place, but Jacobs criticized wider competence. In addition, the legal nature of the Charter has not been decided: will be clear at IGC 2004


Image Technical Services, Inc. v. Eastman Kodak Co., 125 F.3d 1195 (1997)

IP defense


Antitrust in Network Industries [DOJ]

Address by Carl Shapiro, Before the American Law Institute and American Bar Association “Antitrust/Intellectual Property Claims in High Technology Markets”


C-333/94 P Tetra Pak v Commission (Tetra Pak II) [1996] ECR I-5951

Leverage of market power


Bosman case [ECJ/EC]





*1995-11 Fin-Syn rule ceased to exist for Portal Web!

cf.*1995-04-05 FCC

Review of the Syndication and Financial Interest Rules (fin-syn rule)[.WP]

In 1991, rules relaxed and in 1993, schedule was set [Second Report and Order in MM Docket No. 90-162 ("Second R&O")] to expire in November 10, 1995

cf.*1995-03-07 FTC 

Review of the Prime Time Access Rule, Section 73.658(k) of the FCC’s rule – economic review on NPRM for seeking comments on proposal to relax or eliminate PTAR

Both rule are adopted in 1970

memo: 1924年以来、FTCFCCの事例にコメント; FCCはコミュニケーション産業において、個々の競争者を保護するのではなく、消費者厚生を最大化させることを企図; ネットワークが垂直統合のインセンティブを持つのは、(1)インハウス制作が外部調達より効率的である場合(2)外部プロダクションが市場支配力を行使している場合(3)ネットワークが垂直統合を通じて水平的市場支配力を獲得する場合、の三通り。競争法の問題の生じるのは(3)のみ;




First Amendment and “must-carry”




*1993-09-27 Newly added!

Council Directive 93/83/EEC of 27 September 1993 on the coordination of certain rules concerning copyright and rights related to copyright applicable to satellite broadcasting and cable transmission, OJ L 248, pp.15-21 – Copyright…authorship

Article 1(5) – ‘For the purposes of this Directive the principal director of a cinematographic or audiovisual work shall be considered as its author or one of its authors. Member States may provide for others to be considered as its co-authors’


BROOKE GROUP LTD. v. BROWN & WILLIAMSON TOBACCO CORP., 509 U.S. 209 (1993) [US Supreme Court]

Predatory pricing - ’recoup’


Criminal proceedings against Paul Corbeau Case C-320/91 [1993] ECR I-2533, [1995] 4 CMLR 621

ECJ referred to the scope of the monopoly given to the Belgian Post Office and ruled that it was illegal to the extent that it could not be justified under Article 86(2).

*1993, 1991        

AKZO Chemie BV v Commission [1991] ECR 3359, Case C-62/86 [1993] 5 CMLR 215

*1992-12-19 Newly added!

Council Directive 92/100/EEC of 19 November 1992 on rental right and lending right and on certain related to copyright in the field of intellectual property, OJ L 346, pp.61-66 – Copyright…authorship

Article 2(2) – ‘For the purposes of this Directive the principal director of a cinematographic or audiovisual work shall be considered as its author or one of its authors. Member States may provide for others to be considered as its co-authors’


EASTMAN KODAK CO. v. IMAGE TECH. SVCS., 504 U.S. 451 (1992) [US Supreme Court]

Decision’s focus on the implications of customer lock-in and the consequences of imperfect information


Merci Convenzionale Porto di Genova v Siderurgica Gabrielli Case C-179/90 [1991] ECR I-5889, [1994] 4 CMLR 422


Joint Cases C-6/90 and C-9/90 Francovich, [1991] ECR I-5357; [1993] 2 CMLR 66 – State liability for breaches of Community law


ERT v Dimotiki Case C-260/89 [1991] ECR I-2925, [1994] 4 CMLR 540 – Fundamental Rights

ECJ held that if a Member State granted the same undertaking both exclusive right to transmit TV and the right to retransmit broadcasts, it would infringe Article 86(1) when this created a situation in which the broadcaster would be led to infringe Article 82.

              --- the competence of the Court was widened: see *1985-07-11


Hofner & Elser v Macrotron [1991] ECR 1979


RTT v GB-Inno-BM Case C-18/88 [1991] ECR I-5941

ECJ stated that the extension of RTT’s monopoly was itself a state measure contrary to Article 86(1). – Monopoly Leveraging Theory

cf. Telemarketing, Case-311/84 [1985] ECR 3261, [1986] 2 CMLR 558


Guidelines on the application of EEC Competition rules in the Telecommunications sector, OJ C 233, 6.9.1991


Case 213/89 Factortame I, [1990] ECR I-2433; [1990] 3 CMLR 1

*1989-07-13 Newly added!

Joined cases 110/88, 241/88 and 242/88 François Lucazeau and others v Société des Auteurs, Compositeurs et Editeurs de Musique (SACEM) and others [1989] ECR 2811.

Collective Society

tolerated monopolies, or quasi-monopolies, by the Collecting Societies for serving right holders and collecting license fees, as long as the assumption could be made that such monopolistic structures would be the only means of effective protection of the rights of individual owners


MATSUSHITA ELEC. INDUSTRIAL CO. v. ZENITH RADIO, 475 U.S. 574 (1986) [US Supreme Court]

Predatory pricing and related practices cf. Areeda&Turner


Case 60&61/84 Cinéthèque SA and others v Fédération nationale des cinémas français, [1985] ECR 2605 – Fundamental Rights

derogation from community law requirement – ‘the promotion of the cinematographic industry’ in France is within the jurisdiction of the national legislator


Case 14/83 Von Colson [1984] ECR 1891; [1986] 2 CMLR 430 – The Principle of indirect effect





French Republic, Italian Republic and UK v Commission Case C-188/90/80 [1982] ECR 2545

Governments challenged the Directive 80/723 under Article 86(3), Transparency Guideline, legislated by Commission


Srl CILFIT and Lanificio di Gavardo SpA v Ministry of Health Case 283/81 [1982] ECR 3415

Obligation to request a preliminary ruling…Provided that the point of law has already been determined by the ECJ, it can be relied on by a national court in a later case, thereby obviating the need for a reference ‘ACTE CLAIR’ Doctrine


Beltone Electronics Corp., 100 F.T.C. 68, 204 (1982) [FTC]


BROADCAST MUSIC, INC. v. CBS, 441 U.S. 1 (1979) [US Supreme Court]

Blanket lincese


Rewe-Zentral AG v Bundesmonopolverwaltung für Branntwein Case 120/78 [1979] ECR 649 – Cassis de Dijon

doctrine to invalidate trade barriers which cannot be justified under one of the mandatory requirements: the Court decided that a German rule which prescribed the minimum alcohol content for a certain alcoholic beverage could constitute an impediment to the free movement of goods


Berkey Photo v. Eastman Kodak Co., 603 F.2d 263 (1979) [US 2nd Circuit Court]

Monopoly leveraging


Case 106/77 Simmenthal [1978] ECR 629; [1978] 3 CMLR 263 - Supremacy


United Brands v Commission Case 27/76 [1978] ECR 207 [EC]

The concept of dominant position in Article 82


CONTINENTAL T. V., INC. v. GTE SYLVANIA INC., 433 U.S. 36 (1977) [US Supreme Court]

The first substantive Supreme Court antitrust decision shaped by Chicago school

*1973-02-21 ECJ 

Case 6/72 Europemballage Corporation and Continental Can Company v Commission [1973] ECR 215

Application of Article 82(ex. 86) for merger, in the absence of ECMR


Belgische Radio en Televisie (BRT) v SABAM Case 127/73 [1974] ECR 313, [1974] 2 CMLR 238

ECJ established the direct applicability of Article 81 and 82 to the undertakings described in Article 86(2)


Europemballage Corporation and Continental Can Company Inc. v Commission of the European Communities [EC]

Court gave an expansive interpretation to Article 82, to hold that mergers and take-overs could be included within the concept of ‘abuse of a dominant position’ even though there was no mention of merger control in the EC Treaty


Case 11/70 Internationale Handelsgesellschaft [1970] ECR 1125 – Supremacy


RED LION BROADCASTING CO. v. FCC, 395 U.S. 367 (1969) [US Supreme Court]

Fairness doctrine             


Costa v. E.N.E.L. Case 6/64 [1964] ECR 585; [1964] CMLR 425 – The supremacy of Community law

the EEC Treaty created a ‘new legal order’


Da Costa en Schaake NV, Jacob Meijer NV, Hoechst-Holland NV v Netherlands Inland Revenue Administration Cases 28 to 30/62 [1963] ECR 31

Reference for a preliminary ruling…


Van Gend en Loos v. Administratie der Belastingen Case 26/62 [1963] ECR1; [1963] CMLR 105 – The direct effect of Community law                       

Individuals can plead a rule of Community law in national courts where the provisions of the rule of Community law give them rights


UNITED STATES v. du PONT & CO., 351 U.S. 377 (1956) [US Supreme Court]

The "cellophane fallacy"


*1948-05-03 U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc., 334 U.S. 131 (1948) [from SIMPP archive]


*1944-08-07 DOJ

The U.S. Government Reactivates the Paramount case [from SIMPP archive]

cf. The Hollywood Antitrust Case


*Memo – Audiovisual caselaw

Case on general interest (including diversity and pluralism of the press), examples of derogation from the EC Treaty

Case 52/79 (“Debauve”), Case C-288/89 (“Mediawet I”), Case-148/91 (“Veronica”), Case C-23/93 (“TV10”)

Broadcasting services come under the provisions of services

Case C-155/73 (“Sacchi”)


Others…Joint Cases 60 and 61/84 (“Cinéthèque”) see the above



mailto: estate4 a1.mbn.or.jp