Asked by Clarise Gindap on Jun 17, 2024
Verified
In the U.S. Steel case of 1920, the courts held that
A) the structure of an industry is more important than its behavior in determining violations of the antitrust laws.
B) any firm that faces substantial import competition is exempt from the antitrust laws.
C) although U.S. Steel possessed monopoly power, it had not violated the Sherman Act because it had not unreasonably used that power.
D) the fact that U.S. Steel possessed monopoly power was a violation of the Sherman Act.
Industry Structure
The characteristics and organization of an industry, including the number of firms, level of competition, and market dominance.
Antitrust Laws
Legislation designed to promote fair competition for the benefit of consumers, preventing monopolies and promoting a competitive market environment.
U.S. Steel Case
A landmark antitrust case involving the United States Steel Corporation which tested the antitrust laws and monopolistic practices in the early 20th century.
- Comprehend major antitrust litigations and their effects in molding the commercial landscape of the U.S.
- Comprehend the principles such as the "rule of reason" and their utilization in litigation concerning antitrust.
Verified Answer
AM
Adrienne MichelleJun 19, 2024
Final Answer :
C
Explanation :
The U.S. Steel case of 1920 concluded that merely possessing monopoly power was not in itself a violation of the Sherman Act. The key issue was whether the monopoly power was used in a way that constituted an unreasonable restraint of trade. U.S. Steel was found not to have violated the Sherman Act because it did not unreasonably use its monopoly power.
Learning Objectives
- Comprehend major antitrust litigations and their effects in molding the commercial landscape of the U.S.
- Comprehend the principles such as the "rule of reason" and their utilization in litigation concerning antitrust.