Does competition on the market for equipment truly justify a dominant position on its related secondary market(s) ? A legal study on the treatment of home-printer aftermarkets
Files
Liu_22580900_2016.pdf
Closed access - Adobe PDF
- 1.33 MB
Details
- Supervisors
- Faculty
- Degree label
- Abstract
- Home printers are technological miracles that are supposed to make life easier. However, the costs related to their maintenance or functioning is very high especially ink in cartridges is very expensive. Obviously, since printers are durable consumer goods, buyers have to purchase consumables and spare parts several times throughout the lifetime of the primary product in order to guarantee its performance. Under these circumstances, original equipment manufacturers offer their component parts (in this case cartridges) at relatively high prices because the consumer is already locked-in their marketing strategy. The latter basically consists in selling printers for rather low prices in order to attract consumers to buy the primary product on the “up-stream market”. As a matter of consequence, once a consumer entered in the primary market, he or she would become dependent on that same manufacturer for being supplied with the necessary components. Still, must a consumer endure this kind of treatment in which he has nothing left but to purchase the products that have been imposed on him/her ? May we accept this as a fair trading practice? Shouldn’t we consider nowadays that consumers are rational beings with the ability to make the right choices for their own sake ? The answers to these questions will be addressed in detail in this final year project since the purpose of this paper is to provide a comprehensive legal analysis of the subject matter by studying the general rules and principles of competition law that are applicable. The findings of the European Commission’s Decisions regarding aftermarkets and the according case law of the European Court of Justice will also be examined thoroughly throughout this paper.