9 Pages Posted: 7 May 2008 Last revised: 1 Jun 2008
The short essay develops the concept of strategic parallel conduct by filling the old bottle of interdependent conscious parallelism with the new wine of game theory. The conduct underlying the Kodak and Xerox cases is taken as the example of a positive sum game that is better understood and more appropriately litigated under Sherman Act Section One as strategic parallel conduct than under Section Two as monopolization or attempts to monopolize.
Keywords: antitrust, parallel conduct, aftermarkets, game theory, complexity theory
Suggested Citation: Suggested Citation
Peritz, Rudolph J.R., Doctrinal Cross-Dressing in Derivative Aftermarkets: Kodak, Xerox and the Copycat Game. Antitrust Bulletin, Vol. 51, p. 287; NYLS Legal Studies Research Paper No. 07/08-24. Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=1129913