(i) Vertical Mergers (2 marks)

Refer to the articles Ticketmaster merger with Live Nation approved, Vertical pork mergers pass mustard with Competition Bureau and Competition Bureau OK's Suncor, Petro-Canada merger":

(a) Discuss ONE case and discuss the remedies imposed by the Bureau (1 mark).

(b) Suggest one other remedy that you would recommend but not implemented by the Bureau. Explain why you believe your suggested remedy can also be effective in preventing anti-competitive behavior arising from this vertical merger (1 mark).

(ii) Tying (3 marks) Based on the discussion in Abuse of dominance enforcement guidelines, pages 22-23 (items 68-70), and pages 46-47 (items 163-174) only: Suppose you work in the Bureau and customers of Xerox complain that when they purchase their Xerox photocopiers, Xerox states in writing that they have to use Xerox branded parts and Xerox technicians for maintenance. If they use alternative parts or services, the warranty will be immediately void. Based on the GORDIAN example, discuss the steps and criteria that you would examine when determining whether Xerox should be penalized for such a tying/bundling practice. According to your analysis, should Xerox be penalized? Explain.

(iii) Bundling - Microsoft Case (5 marks)

Refer to the article The Microsoft Case 10 Years Later: Antitrust and New Leading "New Economy" Firms, pages 279-285 (paragraphs 15 to 32) only:

(a) Discuss TWO of the four considerations the court examined regarding whether Internet Explorer and Windows operating system were tied products and the subsequent conclusions (2 marks).

(ii) Critique TWO of the terms in the settlement between the DOJ and Microsoft and how you would have modified these two terms to more effectively deter anti-competitive behavior in the future (2 marks).

(iii) Based on the article, do you think MS did involve in anti-competitive practices? Discuss two reasons to explain your conclusion (1 mark).