Dear Readers,
At the heart of this edition is the conflict between the application of provisions of the Sherman Act, on the one hand, and the provisions of the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act of 1982 (“FTAIA”) on the other – to anticompetitive conduct arising offshore that adversely impacts on American consumers. This conflict came to fore in the Motorola v. AU Optronics Corp case relating to sale of liquid crystal display (“LCD”) panels at artificially inflated prices to Motorola, an American cellphone manufacturer to Motorola. Eventually, the high cost of LCDs was transferred to the American consumers. In its recent ruling, the Seventh Circuit held that Motorola is prohibited from recovering damages in U.S. courts under the FTAIA.
The authors in this edition discuss the Seventh Circuit ruling in the Motorola Case and ask certain pertinent questions – how does the Motorola ruling impact global cartels? Does it incentivize them at worst, or ignore them at best? What about the effects of global supply cartels on American consumers in light of the Motorola case? Is the ruling based on correct assessment of the “gives rise to” requirement under the FTAIA? Does it reach an optimum policy outcome in that it prevented the USA from assuming the role of global cartel cop? What was the intent of FTAIA to begin with – to help injured American consumers or to check extra territoriality of American anti-trust laws? What is the recourse for American consumers and firms in such situations? We hope you enjoy the diverse views and perspectives of our authors on this issue.
As always, thank you to our great panel of authors.
Sincerely,
CPI Team
