Anti Competitive Agreements In Competition Law

Competition law is increasingly linked to intellectual property, such as copyrights, trademarks, patents, industrial design rights and, in some legal systems, trade secrets. [105] It is considered that the promotion of innovation through the enforcement of intellectual property rights can foster and limit competitiveness. The question depends on the legality of acquiring a monopoly through the accumulation of intellectual property rights. In this case, the judgment must decide between primacy over intellectual property rights or competitiveness: in many developing Asian countries, including India, competition law is seen as an instrument for reviving economic growth. In Korea and Japan, competition law prevents certain forms of conglomerates. In addition, competition law has promoted fairness in China and Indonesia, as well as international integration in Vietnam. [1] The Hong Kong Competition Regulation entered into force in 2015. [43] Competition law establishes certain practices that are expressly prohibited. These include agreements that include that horizontal agreements are agreements between companies at the same level of the production chain, which is usually between two competitors to set prices, limit production or allocate markets. In all these agreements, there is a presumption in the law that such agreements cause the AAEC. The agreement is also a horizontal agreement. This usually occurs between manufacturers of goods or suppliers of market pricing or distribution services and is generally considered to be the most damaging form of anti-competitive agreements.

. . .