Munich Studies on Innovation and Competition

Volume 10

Series EditorsJosef Drexl, GermanyReto M. Hilty, Germany

More information about this series at http://www.springer.com/series/13275

Kalpana Tyagi

Promoting Competition inInnovation Through MergerControl in the ICT SectorA Comparative and Interdisciplinary Study

Kalpana TyagiCenter for Legal Informatics in the Department of LawAarhus Universitet School of Business andSocial SciencesAarhus, Denmark

ISSN 2199-7462 ISSN 2199-7470 (electronic)Munich Studies on Innovation and CompetitionISBN 978-3-662-58783-6 ISBN 978-3-662-58784-3 (eBook)https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-58784-3

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019This work is subject to copyright. All rights are reserved by the Publisher, whether the whole or part of thematerial is concerned, specifically the rights of translation, reprinting, reuse of illustrations, recitation,broadcasting, reproduction on microfilms or in any other physical way, and transmission or informationstorage and retrieval, electronic adaptation, computer software, or by similar or dissimilar methodologynow known or hereafter developed.The use of general descriptive names, registered names, trademarks, service marks, etc. in this publicationdoes not imply, even in the absence of a specific statement, that such names are exempt from the relevantprotective laws and regulations and therefore free for general use.The publisher, the authors, and the editors are safe to assume that the advice and information in thisbook are believed to be true and accurate at the date of publication. Neither the publisher nor the authors orthe editors give a warranty, express or implied, with respect to the material contained herein or for anyerrors or omissions that may have been made. The publisher remains neutral with regard to jurisdictionalclaims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

This Springer imprint is published by the registered company Springer-Verlag GmbH, DE part of SpringerNature.The registered company address is: Heidelberger Platz 3, 14197 Berlin, Germany

Acknowledgements

I sincerely thank my doctor father Prof Dr Josef Drexl and supervisor Prof Dr PeterPicht for their constant supervision and guidance.

Special thanks to my family and children for their love and relentlessencouragement.

Thanks to my colleagues and friends at the International TelecommunicationsUnion, Geneva. The enriching and lively discussions about the sector strengthenedmy conviction in the promises that the converged telecommunications sector holds.

Without their support and encouragement, I could have never written this PhDthesis.

Errors, if any, are mine.

Aarhus, Denmark Kalpana Tyagi

v

Contents

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.1 Background and Purpose of the Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21.2 Characteristics of Competition in the ICT Markets . . . . . . . . . . . 41.3 Why a Comparative Study? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51.4 Why an Inter-Disciplinary Study? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61.5 Who Should Read This Book? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 71.6 Structure of the Book . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Part I Merger Review

2 (Ir-) Relevant Markets in the High Technology Sector (?) . . . . . . . . 132.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132.2 The SCP Paradigm and the Relevant Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

2.2.1 Relevant Product Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152.2.1.1 Structural Conduct Performance (SCP)

Paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152.2.1.2 Implications of the SSNIP Test and the SCP

Paradigm for Market Definition . . . . . . . . . . . 172.2.2 Relevant Geographic Market . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

2.3 Relevance of the Current Approach for the ICT Sector . . . . . . . . 192.3.1 Is Market Definition (Essentially) a Means to an End? . . . 192.3.2 Does the Current Approach Facilitate Effective

Identification of the (Anti-) Competitive Effects ofMergers? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

2.3.3 Market Definition and Multi-Sided Platforms . . . . . . . . 242.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

3 Salient Features of the ICT Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313.2 Network Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

3.2.1 Direct and Indirect Network Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32

vii

3.2.2 Negative Network Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 333.2.3 Network Effects and Economies of Scale . . . . . . . . . . . 343.2.4 Network Effects and Two-Sided Platforms . . . . . . . . . . 353.2.5 Network Effects, Tipping and Second-Mover Advantage . . 35

3.2.5.1 Second Mover Advantage . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 373.2.5.2 Market Envelopment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37

3.2.6 Network Effects and Barriers to Entry . . . . . . . . . . . . . 383.3 Qwertynomics, Customer Lock-in and Path Dependency . . . . . . . 403.4 Technological Convergence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 413.5 Consumerisation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42

3.5.1 Consumer and Enterprise Product Markets . . . . . . . . . . 433.5.2 Consumerisation and Market Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . 43

3.6 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45

4 Theory of Harm: Unilateral Effects in ICT Mergers . . . . . . . . . . . . 474.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 474.2 Types of Mergers and Theories of Harm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 504.3 Unilateral or Non-coordinated Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

4.3.1 Unilateral Effects, Localised Competition andInnovation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52

4.3.2 Unilateral Effects and the EU, the UK and the USMerger Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55

4.3.3 Case Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584.3.3.1 Oracle/PeopleSoft . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 584.3.3.2 Telefónica/E-Plus . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 604.3.3.3 NXP Semiconductors/Freescale . . . . . . . . . . . 654.3.3.4 ARM/Giesecke & Devrient/Gemalto/JV . . . . . 68

4.4 Co-ordinated Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69

5 Theories of Harm: Vertical Effects in ICT Mergers . . . . . . . . . . . . 735.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73

5.1.1 Vertical Mergers and Efficiencies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745.1.2 Input and Customer Foreclosure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75

5.2 Case Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 765.2.1 TomTom/Tele Atlas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 775.2.2 Google/ITA . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 785.2.3 ARM/Giesecke & Devrient/Gemalto . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 805.2.4 Comcast/NBCU/JV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 825.2.5 Liberty Global/Corelio/W&W/De Vijver Media . . . . . . 855.2.6 Google/Motorola . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88

5.2.6.1 Google/Motorola: The EU Decision . . . . . . . . 895.2.6.2 Google/Motorola: The US DOJ’s Decision . . . 935.2.6.3 Google/Motorola: The Chinese MOFCOM’s

Decision . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 94

6 Theories of Harm: Conglomerate Effects and Types of Evidence . . . 976.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 976.2 Conglomerate Effects and GE/Honeywell . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 98

viii Contents

6.3 The NHM Guidelines on the Assessment of ConglomerateEffects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100

6.4 Case Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1006.4.1 Cisco/Tandberg . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1016.4.2 Microsoft/Skype . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1026.4.3 Intel/McAfee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 103

6.4.3.1 Foreclosure Effects and the Degradationof Interoperability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 104

6.4.3.2 Foreclosure and Technical Tying . . . . . . . . . . 1056.4.3.3 Foreclosure and Commercial Bundling . . . . . . 1066.4.3.4 Foreclosure Strategy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

6.5 Quantitative and Qualitative Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 107

7 Merger Control in the EU and the UK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1137.1 Historical Backdrop: From the ECSC to the Current Approach . . . 113

7.1.1 From the ECSC Treaty to the 1989 Merger Regulation . . 1137.1.2 From the 1989 Merger Regulation to the 2004 Merger

Regulation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1167.2 Procedural Aspects of Merger Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1207.3 When Is a Joint Venture Treated as a Concentration? . . . . . . . . . 1227.4 Requests for Referral and Co-operation Between the

Commission, the National Regulatory and the NationalCompetition Authorities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123

7.5 Electronic Communications Sector: From Regulationto Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 125

7.6 Commitments: Balancing Proportionality and Effectiveness . . . . . 1297.7 Commitments: Conditions and Obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129

8 Merger Control in the US . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1318.1 Legislative Framework . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1318.2 The DOJ and the FTC: The Disequilibrium of Power . . . . . . . . . 1328.3 Mergers and the FCC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1368.4 2010 Horizontal Merger Guidelines . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1368.5 2011 Merger Remedies Guide . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1378.6 Prohibited Mergers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139

Part II Merger Remedies and Merger Remedy-Related Arbitration

9 Mergers, Innovation and Remedies’ Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1439.1 Mergers, Innovation and Competition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1439.2 Merger Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149

9.2.1 Merger Remedies: A Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1499.2.2 Why Do We Need Remedies? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1519.2.3 Merger Remedies and the Principle of Proportionality . . . 1519.2.4 Ex-post Studies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153

Contents ix

9.3 Factors to Consider in the Design of Remedies in High TechMergers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1569.3.1 ‘Upgrade Treadmill’, Hidden Costs and Consumer

Harm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1569.3.2 ‘Gatekeeper Effects’ and Merger Remedies . . . . . . . . . 1589.3.3 Additional Factors to Be Considered in the Design of

Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 159

10 Merger Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161

11 Structural Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16511.1 Preference for Structural Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16511.2 Divestitures in Oligopolistic Markets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16711.3 What Is a Divestiture? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169

11.3.1 Crown Jewel . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17011.3.2 Upfront Buyer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17111.3.3 Carve-Outs and the Nature of Divested Business . . . . 17211.3.4 Access Remedies: Structural or Non-Structural? . . . . . 175

11.4 Factors to be Considered in the Design of StructuralRemedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17711.4.1 Identity and Qualifications of the Buyer . . . . . . . . . . . 17811.4.2 Removal of Links with Competitors . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17911.4.3 Managing a Successful Divestiture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18011.4.4 Period for Divestiture . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18111.4.5 Interim Period and Preservation of Assets . . . . . . . . . 18111.4.6 Hold-Separate Obligations and Hold-Separate

Manager . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18211.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183

12 Non-structural Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18512.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18512.2 When Non-structural Remedies Are More Preferable . . . . . . . . . 18712.3 Access Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 189

12.3.1 Intel/McAfee: Interoperability Remediesin a Conglomerate Merger . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191

12.3.2 Google/ITA: Non-structural Remediesin Potential Vertical Mergers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19212.3.2.1 Licensing of QPX . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19312.3.2.2 Licensing of InstaSearch . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193

12.3.3 Interoperability Remedies for Vertical Concernsin ARM/G&D/Gemalto/JV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194

12.3.4 Comcast/NBCU/JV: FRANDly Access to the OVDs . . 19512.3.5 Axalto/Gemplus: FRANDly Access to the OTA SIM

Platforms . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 197

x Contents

12.4 Other Non-structural Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19812.4.1 Exclusive Long-Term Clauses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19812.4.2 Restrictive Licensing Practices, Non-discrimination

Clauses and Anti-retaliation Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . 19912.4.3 Firewall Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 201

12.5 Impediments to Effective Implementation of Remedies . . . . . . . 203

13 Remedies in the Telecommunications Sector . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20713.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20713.2 T-Mobile/Orange UK . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209

13.2.1 Remedies in T-Mobile/Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21013.2.1.1 T-Mobile/3UK’s RAN Sharing Agreement . 21013.2.1.2 Spectrum . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 210

13.3 Telefónica/E-Plus Deutschland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21213.3.1 The MNO Remedy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21313.3.2 The MBA Remedy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21313.3.3 The Non-MNO Remedy . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 215

13.4 Remedies in H3G Austria/Orange and H3G Ireland/TelefónicaIreland . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21513.4.1 Hutchison 3G Austria/Orange . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21513.4.2 Hutchison 3G Ireland/Telefónica Ireland . . . . . . . . . . 21713.4.3 H3G Italy/Wind/JV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 218

13.5 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

14 Merger Remedy-Related Arbitration: une innovation suprenante . . . 22114.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22114.2 Arbitration Clause in Merger Commitments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22314.3 Arbitration: An erga omnes Offer to Arbitrate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22414.4 Interpretation of Commitments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22614.5 Subject Matter of Arbitration Clauses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228

14.5.1 Type of Arbitration: Institutional or Ad Hoc? . . . . . . . 22914.5.2 Appointment of Arbitrators . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23014.5.3 Confidentiality in Arbitration Proceedings . . . . . . . . . 23114.5.4 Burden of Proof . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23214.5.5 Powers of the Commission . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23214.5.6 Pre-arbitration Dispute Settlement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23414.5.7 Scope of Arbitration Clause: What Is Arbitrable

and Who Can Initiate Arbitration? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23614.5.8 Substantive Law . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23714.5.9 Interim Awards and Preliminary Rulings . . . . . . . . . . 23814.5.10 Place and Language of Arbitration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 238

15 RTI v. Sky: The First Reported Case of Merger Remedy RelatedArbitration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24115.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 241

15.1.1 Background and Facts of the Case . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24115.1.2 Jurisdiction of the Arbitral Tribunal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 242

Contents xi

15.1.3 The Interpretation of the Commitments . . . . . . . . . . . 24315.1.4 Can the Tribunal Amend the Scope of the

Commitments? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24415.2 Resolution of Ambiguities in the Arbitration Agreement . . . . . . 24415.3 Baseball Arbitration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24715.4 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 247

16 Monitoring Trustee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25116.1 Monitoring Trustee: The ‘Eyes and Ears’ of the Commission . . . 25116.2 Appointment, Conflict of Interest and the Independence

of Trustee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25216.3 Qualifications and Skill Set of the Trustee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25416.4 Monitoring Trustee and Confidential Information . . . . . . . . . . . 25516.5 Monitoring Trustee or a Divestiture Trustee? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25616.6 The Role and Responsibility of the Trustee . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25716.7 Monitoring Trustee or a ‘Managing’ Trustee? . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25916.8 The Practice in the US . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260

Part III Big Data Mergers: Merger Review and Remedies

17 Big Data and Merger Control . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26517.1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26517.2 Data, Big Data, Personal Data and Merger Control . . . . . . . . . . 267

17.2.1 Data: The New Currency of the Digital Economy . . . . 26817.2.2 Value of Big Data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26917.2.3 Zero Price Effect & User Dynamism as Non-Price

Parameter of Competition and Innovation in the MSPs . . 27017.2.4 Personal Data: Privacy Concerns and Law . . . . . . . . . 272

17.3 Competition, Consumer Protection and Privacy Laws . . . . . . . . 27417.4 Jurisdiction and Filing Threshold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27717.5 Case Laws . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 280

17.5.1 Google/Double Click . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28017.5.1.1 Decision of the Competition Authorities . . . 28017.5.1.2 Comment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 282

17.5.2 Facebook/Whatsapp . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28317.5.2.1 Decision of the Competition Authorities . . . 28317.5.2.2 Comment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28417.5.2.3 Ex-post Developments: Commission Fines

Facebook . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28517.5.3 Telefónica UK/Vodafone UK/Everything

Everywhere . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28617.5.4 Microsoft/Yahoo! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28717.5.5 Sanofi/Google/DMI JV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288

17.6 Microsoft/LinkedIn . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29017.6.1 Horizontal Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29117.6.2 Vertical Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291

xii Contents

17.6.3 Conglomerate Effects . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29217.6.4 Commitments . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294

17.7 Remedies for Big Data Mergers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29517.7.1 The 2018 EU General Data Protection Regulation and

Potential Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29617.7.2 Thomson/Reuters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 298

17.7.2.1 Competitive Assessment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29817.7.2.2 Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300

17.8 Summary and Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301

Part IV Summary, Conclusions and the Road Ahead

18 Summary, Conclusions and Further Research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 307

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313

Contents xiii

Abbreviations

4-to-3 Four-to-three3-to-2 Three-to-twoAP Application ProcessorsAPI Application Program InterfaceARPU Average Revenue per UserBKartA BundeskartellsamtBNetzA BundesnetzagenturBT British TelecomBYOD Bring Your Own DeviceCAS Conditional Access SystemCE Consumer ElectronicsCFI Court of First InstanceCFIUS Committee on Foreign Investments in the United StatesCIS Competitive Impact StatementCMA Competition and Markets AuthorityCPC Cost-Per-ClickCPU Central Processing UnitCR Concentration RatioCRM Customer Resource ManagementDACS Dynamic Availability Calculating SystemDBMS Data Base Management SystemsDBS Direct Broadcast SatelliteDOJ Department of JusticeD-I-Y Do-It-YourselfDSK Dvorak Simplified KeyboardDT Deutsche TelekomDTH Direct-to-HomeDVM De Vijver MediaEC European CommunityECLR European Competition Law Review

xv

ECSC Treaty European Coal and Steel Community TreatyEE Everything EverywhereEEA European Economic AreaEEC European Economic CommunityERP Enterprise Resource PlanningESA European Space AgencyEU European UnionEU HMG European Union Horizontal Merger GuidelinesEUMR European Union Merger RegulationFCC Federal Communications CommissionFERM Full Equilibrium Market TestFRAND Fair, Reasonable and Non-DiscriminatoryFT France TélécomFTA Free-to-AirFTC Federal Trade CommissionG&D Giesecke & DevrientGC General CourtGDPR General Data Protection RegulationGECAS General Electric Capital Aviation ServicesH3G Hutchison 3GHDD Hard Disk DriveHDTV High Definition TelevisionHHI Herfindahl-Hirschman IndexHMT Hypothetical Monopolist TestHSR Hart-Scott-Radino ActIBP Internet Backbone ProviderICA Italian Competition AuthorityICC International Chamber of CommerceICN International Competition NetworkICT Information Communication TechnologyIMTC International Multimedia Teleconferencing ConsortiumIO Industrial OrganizationIoT Internet of ThingsIP Internet ProtocolIPR Intellectual Property RightISM Infrastructure, Industrial, Scientific and Medical SegmentIT Information TechnologyKOL Key Opinion LeaderMBA Mobile Bitstream AccessML Machine LearningMNO Mobile Network OperatorMOFCOM Ministry of CommerceMoU Memorandum of UnderstandingMRG Merger Remedies Guide

xvi Abbreviations

MSA Manufacturing Services AgreementMVNOs Mobile Virtual Network OperatorsMVPDs Multichannel Video Programming DistributorsNACE Nomenclature statistique des activités économiques dans la

Communauté européenneNASA National Aeronautics and Space AdministrationNCA National Competition AuthorityNDRC National Development and Reform CommissionNFC Near Field CommunicationsNHM Non-Horizontal MergerNIE New Industrial EconomicsNIO New Industrial OrganizationNRA National Regulatory AuthorityNSA Network Sharing AgreementOEMs Original Equipment ManufacturersOFT Office of Fair TradingO&O TV Owned & Operated Television StationsOS Operating SystemOTA Over-the-AirOTAs Online Travel AgenciesOVDs Online Video Programming DistributorsP&S system Pricing & Shopping SystemPET Polyethylene TerephthalatePND Portable Navigable DevicePSN Professional Services NetworkRF SST Radio Frequency Small Signal TransistorsRIM Research-in-MotionRTR Rundfunk & Telekom Regulierungs GmbHSAIC State Administration for Industry and CommerceSAMR State Administration for Market RegulationSBM Stretch Blow MouldingSCP Structure Conduct PerformanceSE Secure ElementsSEPs Standard Essential PatentsSfB Skype for BusinessSIEC Substantial Impediment to Effective CompetitionSLS Substantial Lessening of CompetitionSPA Sale Purchase AgreementSO Statement of ObjectionsSMP Significant Market PowerSSNIP Small but Significant Non-transitory Increase in PricesSSVs Security Software VendorsTKK Telekom-Control-KommissionTEE Trusted Execution Environment

Abbreviations xvii

TIP Telepresence Interoperability ProtocolTSA Transitional Services AgreementTS/E Time Series/Economic DataUK MAG UK Merger Assessment GuidelinesUPP Upward Pricing PressureUS HMG US Horizontal Merger GuidelinesVARs Value Added ResellersVCS Video Conferencing SolutionWMP Windows Media PlayerUNCITRAL United Nations Commission on International Trade LawUPP Upward Pricing PressureVAR Value Added ResellerVoIP Voice over Internet Protocol

xviii Abbreviations

EU Treaties and Presidency Conclusions

Presidency Conclusions (Lisbon European Council, 23 and 24 March 2000)<http://europa.eu/council/off/conclu/mar2000/mar2000_en.pdf>accessed 06 January 2019 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Consolidated version of the Treaty on European Union [2012] OJ C326/13 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 152

EU RegulationsCouncil Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 of 21 December 1989 on thecontrol of concentration between undertakings [1990] OJ L395/01 . . . . . . . . 115Council Regulation (EC) No 139/2004 of 20 January 2004 on thecontrol of concentration between undertakings [2004]OJ L 24/01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51, 56, 118, 120, 129Council Regulation (EC) No 1310/97 of 30 June 1997 amending Regulation(EEC) No 4064/89 on the control of concentrations between undertakings[1997] OJ L 180/01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of theCouncil of 27 April 2016 on the protection of natural persons with regardto the processing of personal data and on the free movement of such data,and repealing Directive 95/46/EC (General Data Protection Regulation)[2016] OJ L 119/01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 296–298

EU Guidelines and NoticesCommission, ‘Green Paper on the Development of the Common Marketfor Telecommunications Services and Equipment’ COM (1987) 290 final . . . 126Commission Notice on the treatment of cooperative joint ventures underArticle 85 of the Treaty [1993] OJ C43/2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122Commission Notice on the definition of relevant market for the purposesof Community Competition Law [1997] OJ C372/02 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18, 23

xix

Commission Notice on the concept of full-function joint ventures underCouncil Regulation (EEC) No 4064/89 on the control of concentrationsbetween undertakings [1998] OJ C 66/1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 122Commission Notice on remedies acceptable under Council Regulation(EEC) No 4064/89 and under Commission Regulation (EC) No 447/98 [2001]OJ C 68/3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119Guidelines on the assessment of horizontal mergers under the CouncilRegulation on the control of concentrations between undertakings[2004] OJ C31/05 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 15, 20, 49, 56, 70, 146, 151Guidelines on the assessment of non-horizontal mergers under the CouncilRegulation on the control of concentrations between undertakings [2008]OJ C265/06 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75, 76, 90, 100Commission Notice on remedies acceptable under Council Regulation(EC) No 139/2004 and under Commission Regulation (EC) No 802/2004[2008] OJ C 267/01 119–122, 129, 130, 150, 152, 163, 166, 167, 169, 170, 178–

181, 189, 190, 198, 204, 221, 223, 251, 252, 254, 256, 257Commission Guidelines on the applicability of Article 101 of the Treatyon the Functioning of the European Union to horizontal co-operationagreements [2011] OJ C11/01 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 91, 176, 177

EU DirectivesDirective 2002/21/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of7 March 2002 on a common regulatory framework for electroniccommunications networks and services [2002] OJ L 108/33 . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Directive 2002/20/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of7 March 2002 on the authorisation of electronic communications servicesand networks [2002] OJ L 108/21 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Directive 2002/19/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of7 March 2002 on access to, and interconnection of, electroniccommunications networks and associated facilities [2002] OJ L 108/7 . . . . . 126Directive 2002/22/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of7 March 2002 on universal service and users’ rights relating to electroniccommunications networks and services [2002] OJ L 108/51 . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Decision 676/2002/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council of7 March 2002 on a regulatory framework for radio spectrum policy in theEuropean Community [2002] OJ L 108/1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126Commission, ‘Towards a New Framework for Electronic CommunicationsInfrastructure and Associated Services: The 1999 Review’ Com (99) 539 . . . 126

Table of United Kingdom LegislationEnterprise Act 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278The Enterprise and Regulatory Reform Act 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 119, 120

xx EU Treaties and Presidency Conclusions

UK GuidelinesCompetition Commission, CC8 – Merger Remedies: CompetitionCommission Guidelines [November 2008] . . . 74, 120, 153, 156, 163, 165, 173,

176, 189Competition Commission, CC3 – Guidelines for Market Investigations:their role, procedures, assessment and remedies [April 2013] . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20A joint publication of the Competition Commission and the Office of FairTrading, CC2 (Revised)/OFT 1254: Merger Assessment Guidelines[September 2010] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 20, 57

Table of US Legislation§7 Clayton Act 15 U.S.C. §18 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131, 133, 135§ 5 Federal Trade Commission Act, 15 U.S.C. § 45 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133

US GuidelinesHorizontal Merger Guidelines, U.S. Department of Justice and the FederalTrade Commission [Issued 1992, 1997] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53Antitrust Division Policy Guide to Merger Remedies, U.S. Departmentof Justice, Antitrust Division [2004] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167, 261Horizontal Merger Guidelines, U.S. Department of Justice and the FederalTrade Commission [2010] . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13, 15, 19, 53, 55, 56Antitrust Division Policy Guide to Merger Remedies, U.S. Departmentof Justice, Antitrust Division [2011] . . . . . . . . . . . 137, 152, 162, 169, 185, 261Federal Trade Commission, Premerger Notification and the MergerReview Process . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132, 134Federal Trade Commission, Frequently Asked Questions about MergerConsent Order Provisions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170

EU Treaties and Presidency Conclusions xxi

Table of Cases

Commission DecisionsABB/Daimler Benz (Case IV/M.580) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70Aerospatiale-Alenia/DE Havilland (Case No IV/M.053) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116Alcan/Pechiney (Case COMP/M.1715) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177Alcatel/Finmeccanica/Alcatel Alenia Space & Telespazio(Case No COMP/M.3680) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190, 229–231, 233, 234, 236–238Apple/Beats (Case No COMP/M.7290) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43, 148ARM/Giesecke & Devrient/Gemalto/ JV (Case COMP/M.6564) . . . . . 9, 11, 38,

68, 76, 80, 81, 118, 122, 123, 188, 194, 253Astra Zeneca/Novartis (Case COMP/M.1806) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170Axalto/Gemplus (Case COMP/M.3998) . . . . . . . . 130, 197, 198, 230, 233, 234,

236, 253, 254, 255, 258Cisco/Tandberg (Case COMP/M.5669) . . . . 9, 12, 101, 108, 166, 176, 177, 188,

254, 258Dow Chemical/Union Carbide (Case COMP/M.1671) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190DSM/Roche Vitamins (COMP/M.2972) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190Elf Aquitaine-Thyssen/Minol AG (Case No IV/M.235) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224, 229Facebook/WhatsApp (Case No COMP/M.7217) . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 40, 283, 285Facebook/WhatsApp (Case N0. 8228, Article 14(1) decision) . . . . . . . . 285, 286Liberty Global/Corelio/W&W/De Vijver Media (Case COMP/M.7194) . . . 9, 12,

85, 88, 109Liberty Global/Ziggo (Case COMP/M.7000) . . . . . 196, 229, 230, 233–237, 239GE/Instrumentarium (Case COMP/M.3083) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191Gencor/Lonrho (Case No IV/M.619) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186Glaxo Wellcome/Smithkline Beecham (Case IV/M.1846) . . . . . 49, 187, 232, 246Google/DoubleClick (Case COMP/M.4731) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 73, 76, 281Google/Motorola Mobility (Case COMP/M.6381) . . . . . . . . . . 9, 12, 88, 90–92Hoechst/Rhône Poulenc (Case IV/M.1378) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190Hutchison 3G Austria/Orange Austria (Case COMP/M.6497) . . . . . 57, 215, 216Hutchison 3G Ireland/Telefónica Ireland (Case No COMP/M.6992) . . . 190, 217,

255, 260xxiii

Hutchison 3G Italy/Wind/JV (Case M.7758) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60, 209, 218, 219Hutchison 3G UK/Telefónica UK (Case M.7612) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 124Intel/McAfee (Case COMP/M.5984) . . . . . . 9, 12, 100, 103–108, 166, 188, 191,

192, 232, 234, 236–239, 253–255, 258Johnson & Johnson/Guidant (Case COMP/M.3687) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 179, 182Microsoft/LinkedIn (Case M.8124) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 291, 292Microsoft/Skype (Case COMP/M 6281) . . . . . . . . . . . . 12, 14, 20, 27, 102, 118Microsoft/Yahoo! Search Business (Case COMP/M.5727) . . . . . . . . . . 287, 288Nestlé/Perrier (Case No IV/M.190) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69, 70NewsCorp/Telepiù (Case COMP/M 2876) . . . 195, 199, 232, 233, 239, 242, 245Nokia/Navteq (Case COMP/M.4942) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21, 42NXP Semiconductors/Freescale Semiconductor (Case M.7585) . . . 9, 11, 48, 65,

67, 120, 153, 172, 174, 182, 201, 202, 223, 228, 229, 231, 232, 234, 235, 237,258–260

Orange/Jazztel (Case COMP/M7421) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 228–232, 239Pernod Ricard/Allied Domecq (Case COMP/M.3779) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170Pfizer/Pharmacia (Case COMP/M.2922) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170Siemens/Drägerwerk/JV (Case COMP/M2861) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 191Siemens/VA Tech (Case COMP/M.3653) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 180Telefónica Deutschland/E-Plus (Case M.7018) . . . . . . . 9, 11, 57, 58, 61, 63–65,

107, 111, 123, 124, 130, 212–214Telefónica UK/Vodafone UK/Everything Everywhere(Case COMP/M.6314) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 286Telia/Telenor (Case IV/M 1439) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 127T-Mobile Austria/Tele.ring (Case COMP/M.3916) . . . . . . . . . . 34, 70, 178, 180T-Mobile/Orange (Case COMP/M.5650) . . . 9, 49, 107, 122–124, 209, 211, 212TomTom/Tele Atlas (Case COMP/M 4854) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11, 77Thomson Corporation/Reuters Group (Case COMP/M.4726) . . . . . . . 199, 236,

298, 200Western Digital Ireland/Viviti Technologies (Case COMP/M.6203) . . 171, 179, 183Nestle/Ralston Purina (Case COMP/M.2337) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 170Sanofi/Google/DMI JV (Case M.7813) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288Universal Music Group/EMI Music (Case COMP/M.6458) . . . . . . . . . . . . . 178Vodafone/ONO (Case M.7231) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 302

General CourtAirtours plc v Commission (Case T-342/99) [2002] ECR II-2585 . . . . . . 56, 69,

116, 117Arbeitsgemeinschaft der öffentlich-rechtlichen Rundfunkanstaltender Bundesrepublik Deutschland (ARD) v Commission (Case T-158/00)[2003] ECR II-3825 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150, 224Cementbouw v Commission (Case T-282/02) [2006] ECR II-319 . . . . . . . . 129Cisco Systems Inc. v Commission (Case T-79/12) [2013],Judgment of 11.12.2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

xxiv Table of Cases

Compagnie Maritime Belge v Commission (Case T-24/93) [1996]ECR II-1201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00EDP v Commission (Case T-87/05) [2005] ECR II-3745 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121Gencor Ltd. v Commission (Case T-102/96) [1999] ECR II-753, [1999]4 CMLR 971 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 186General Electric v Commission (Case T-210/01) [2005] ECR II-5575 . . . . . 121Impala v Commission (Case T-464/04) [2006] ECR II-2289, [2006]5 CMLR 19 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00Manufacture française des pneumatiques Michelin v Commission of theEuropean Communities (Michelin II) (Case T-203/01) [2003] ECR II-4071 . . . . 119Qualcomm Wireless Business Solution Europe BV v Commission(Case T-48/04) [2009] ECR II-2029 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 121Royal Philips Electronics NV v Commission (Case T-119/02) [2003]ECR I-1433 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 150Schneider Electric SA v Commission (Case T-77/02) [2002]ECR II-4201 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 116, 117Tetra Laval BV v Commission (Case T-5/02) [2002] ECR II-4381 . . . . 116, 117

Court of JusticeCommission v Tetra Laval BV (Case C-13/03) [2005] ECR I-1113 . . . . 116, 191Commission v Tetra Laval (Case C12/03) [2005] ECR-I 987 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00Compagnie maritime belge transports and Others v Commission(Joined cases C-395/96 P and C-396/96) [2000] ECR I-1365 . . . . . . . . . . 69, 71Eco Swiss China Time Ltd. v. Benetton International NV (Case C126/97)[1999] ECR I-3055 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 226, 233Établissements Consten and Grundig-Verkaufs-Gmbh v. Commission CMLR(1961-66) (CCH) (1966) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00Europemballage Corporation and Continental Can Company v Commission(Case 6-72) [1973] ECR 215 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 115Hoffmann-La Roche & Co. AG v Commission of the European Communities(Case 85/76) [1979] ECR 461 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Scarlet Extended SA v Société belge des auteurs, compositeurs et éditeursSCRLC(SABAM) (Case C-70/10) [2011] ECR I-11959 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276

US Cases

DOJ and FTC CasesUnited States v. Comcast Corp., No. 1:11-cv-00106, Proposed FinalJudgment at IV (D.D.C. Jan. 18, 2011) . . . . . . 9, 12, 82–84, 138, 196, 200, 201United States v. Google Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00688, Competitive ImpactStatement (D.D.C. Apr 8, 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 84, 196, 200, 201United States v. Google Inc., No. 1:11-cv-00688, Proposed FinalJudgment (D.D.C. Apr. 8, 2011) . . . . . . . . 9, 138, 193, 194, 200, 201, 203, 223United States v. Ticketmaster Entertainment, Inc., No. 1:10-cv-00139,2010 Final Judgment (D.D.C. July 30, 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138, 200

Table of Cases xxv

Press Release, Federal Trade Commission, Federal Trade Commission ClosesGoogle/DoubleClick Investigation (Dec. 20, 2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 281Statement of Federal Trade Commission, Google/DoubleClick, FTCFile No. 071-0170 (Dec. 20.2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281Concurring Statement of Commissioner Jon Leibowitz, Google/DoubleClick,FTC File No. 071-0170 (Dec. 20, 2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 281Dissenting Statement of Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour,Google/DoubleClick, FTC File No. 071-0170 (Dec. 20, 2007) . . . 202, 275, 281Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Statement of the Department of JusticeAntitrust Division on Its Decision to Close Its Investigation of the InternetSearch and Paid Search Advertising Agreement Between MicrosoftCorporation and Yahoo! Inc. (Feb. 18, 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288Statement of the Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division on Its Decisionto Close Its Investigations of Google Inc.’s Acquisition of MotorolaMobility Holdings Inc. and the Acquisitions of Certain Patents byApple Inc., Microsoft Corp. a. . ., (Feb. 2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 12, 93United States v. Thomson Corp., No. 08-0262, Complaint (D.D.C. filedFeb.19, 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Justice Department Requires Thomsonto Sell Financial Data and Related Assets in Order to Acquire Reuters(Feb. 19, 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 300United States v. Bazaarvoice Inc., Case No. 13-cv-00133-WHO, 2014 WL203966 (N.D. Cal. Jan. 8, 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149Press Release, U.S. Dep’t of Justice, Justice Department Issues StatementsRegarding AT&T Inc.’s Abandonment of its Proposed Acquisition ofT-Mobile USA Inc. (Dec. 19, 2011) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 139In re Glaxo Wellcome plc and SmithKline Beecham plc, DocketNo. C-3990, Complaint at ¶ 28 (December 15, 2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 166In re Boston Scientific Corp., Docket No. C-4164, Decision andOrder (July 21, 2006) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 172In re NXP Semiconductors N.V., File Number 151-0090, DocketNo. C-4560, Analysis of Agreement Containing Consent Orders to AidPublic Comment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 66, 67Statement of the Department of Justice Antitrust Division on Its Decision toClose Its Investigation of the Internet Search and Paid Search AdvertisingAgreement Between Microsoft Corporation and Yahoo! Inc., dt.18 February 2010 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 288Justice Department will not challenge Cisco’s acquisition of Tandberg(29 March 2010) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 167, 308FTC requires NXP Semiconductors N.V. to Divest RF Power AmplifierAssets as a Condition of Acquiring Freescale Semiconductor Ltd. . . . . . . . . 308

Court CasesUnited States v. E.I. du Pont de Nemours & Co 366 U.S. 316 (1961) . . . . . . 165United States v. E.I. Du Pont de Nemours & Co 351 U.S. 377 (1956) . . . . . . 15Brown Shoe Co. v. United States 370 U.S. 294 (1962) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131

xxvi Table of Cases

United States v. Siemens Corp. 621 F.2d 499 (2d Cir. 1980) . . . . . . . . . . . . 132United States v. Philadelphia National Bank 374 US 321(1963) . . . . . . . . . . 132United States v. Aluminium Company of America 377 US 271(1964) . . . . . 132United States v. Continental Can Co 378 US 441(1964) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 00United States v. Von Grocery’s Co 384 US 270(1966) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47United States v. Pabst Brewing Co 384 US 546(1966) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132United States v. Marine Bancorporation Inc. 418 US 602(1974) . . . . . . . . . 132United States v. Connecticut National Bank 418 US 650(1974) . . . . . . . . . . 132General Dynamics 415 US 486(1974) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 132United States v. Von’s Grocery Co 384 U.S. 270(1966) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47United States v. Microsoft Corp 87 F.Supp. 2d 30 (D.D.C. 2000) . . . . . . . . . 33United States v. SunGard Data Sys Inc. 172 F. Supp.2d 172 (D.D.C. 2001) . . 110United States v. Columbia Co 334 U.S. 495(1948) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131Federal Trade Commission v. Whole Foods Market Inc. 548 F.3d 1028(D.C. Cir. 2008) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 135Hospital Corp. v. FTC 807 F.2d 1381 (7th Cir. 1986) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 131KinderStart.com LLC v. Google, No. C06-2057 JF (RS), 2007 WL831806 (N.D. Cal. 2007) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 271New York v. Kraft General Foods Inc. 926 F.Supp 321 (S.D.N.Y. 1995) . . . . 55United States v. Oracle Corporation 331 F. Supp. 2d 1098(N.D.Cal. 2004) . . . . 9, 11, 13, 22, 40, 43, 48, 55, 58, 59, 70, 110, 131, 132, 135, 157FTC v. Swedish Match 131 F.Supp. 2d 151(D.D.C. 2000) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55United States v. H&R Block Inc. 833 F.Supp.2d 36(2011) . . . . . 14, 15, 71, 139United States v. Bazaarvoice, Inc. No. 13-00133, 2014 U.S. Dist. LEXIS3284 (N.D. Cal. 2014) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 149United States v. 3D Systems Corp 2002-2 Trade Cas. ¶ 73 (D.D.C. 2001) . . 162American Express Co. et al v. Italian Colors Restaurant et al 667 F.3d 204,decided June 20, 2013 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 222Continental T.V. Inc., v. GTE Sylvania Inc., 433 US 36(1977) . . . . . . . . . . . 00

UK Competition Authority CasesOffice of Fair Trading, Anticipated acquisition by Facebook Inc. ofInstagram Inc., ME/5525/12 (22 August 2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14, 25, 27, 178Office of Fair Trading, Completed Acquisition by Motorola Mobility(Google, Inc.) of Waze Mobile Ltd., ME/6167/13(17 December 2013) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 14, 277, 278Competition & Markets Authority, BT Group plc and EE Limited: A reporton the anticipated acquisition by BT Group plc of EE Limited(15 January 2016) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49, 57, 110, 124

Chinese MOFCOM (now the SAMR)Announcement No. 25, 2012 of the Ministry ofCommerce-Announcement of Approval with Additional RestrictiveConditions of the Acquisition of Motorola Mobility by Google(31 May 2012) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9, 12, 94, 308

Table of Cases xxvii

List of Figures

Fig. 2.1 Harvard School’s SCP Paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16Fig. 2.2 Chicago School’s assessment to SCP Paradigm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Fig. 3.1 Microsoft’s Envelopment of Real Network . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38

Fig. 13.1 Overview of the telecoms market: complex relationship betweenthe MNOs and the MVNOs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208

Fig. 17.1 Competition, consumer and data protection law in big datamergers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276

xxix

List of Table

Table 4.1 The pre- and post-merger Nash equilibrium best responsefunction (in the presence of ‘localised competition’) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

xxxi