Analyzing China's Guiding Case No. 79 Under Section 1 of Sherman Act - A Per Se Tying Violation or Not?

University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law Online, Vol. 39, 2018

11 Pages Posted: 12 Apr 2018 Last revised: 25 Apr 2018

See all articles by Sinchit Lai

Sinchit Lai

University of Pennsylvania, Law School

Date Written: March 29, 2018

Abstract

In China’s Guiding Case No. 79, Wu Xiaoqin v. Shaanxi BC & TV Network (Group) Co., Ltd., the Supreme People’s Court of China held that Defendant BC & TV Network engaged in tie-in sales, tying basic TV programs to paid TV programs, and thus violated article 17.1.5 of China’s Anti-Monopoly Law. This Comment analyzes this case under Section 1 of the U.S. Sherman Act and shows how a U.S. court might analyze it differently. After analyzing each element required for a tying agreement, this Comment concludes that a U.S. court is unlikely to hold that the alleged tying arrangement is a per se violation of the federal antitrust law.

Keywords: China; Anti-Monopoly Law; Guiding Case; Tying; Sherman Act; per se

Suggested Citation

Lai, Sinchit, Analyzing China's Guiding Case No. 79 Under Section 1 of Sherman Act - A Per Se Tying Violation or Not? (March 29, 2018). University of Pennsylvania Journal of International Law Online, Vol. 39, 2018 , Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3152693

Sinchit Lai (Contact Author)

University of Pennsylvania, Law School ( email )

Philadelphia, PA 19104
United States

Here is the Coronavirus
related research on SSRN

Paper statistics

Downloads
32
Abstract Views
167
PlumX Metrics