Get 20M+ Full-Text Papers For Less Than $1.50/day. Start a 14-Day Trial for You or Your Team.

Learn More →

The PRC NDRC case against Qualcomm: a misguided venture or justified enforcement of competition law?

The PRC NDRC case against Qualcomm: a misguided venture or justified enforcement of competition law? ABSTRACTThe Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) has attracted much attention in recent years. There have been accusations of protectionism and of the AML being used to target foreign companies. Against this backdrop, the investigation by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) against Qualcomm over the latter’s licensing practices was especially controversial. This was particularly so because China has long complained about the high licensing fees its domestic manufacturers have to pay to foreign patentees. And Qualcomm is a major licensor of communications technologies and earns a very considerable amount of licensing revenue in China. Qualcomm was eventually slapped the largest fine in the history of Chinese AML enforcement and subject to a number of behavioural remedies. The question arises as to whether the NDRC decision was a poorly reasoned protectionist venture or was in fact consistent with sound competition law principles. This article attempts to answer this question by critically evaluating the reasoning of the decision. It finds that even though the NDRC reached the correct conclusion on some of the claims, the analysis and the reasoning leave much to be desired. http://www.deepdyve.com/assets/images/DeepDyve-Logo-lg.png Journal of Antitrust Enforcement Oxford University Press

The PRC NDRC case against Qualcomm: a misguided venture or justified enforcement of competition law?

Journal of Antitrust Enforcement , Volume 5 (1) – Apr 1, 2017

Loading next page...
 
/lp/oxford-university-press/the-prc-ndrc-case-against-qualcomm-a-misguided-venture-or-justified-VMY8x09HmP

References (0)

References for this paper are not available at this time. We will be adding them shortly, thank you for your patience.

Publisher
Oxford University Press
Copyright
© The Author 2016. Published by Oxford University Press. All rights reserved. For permissions, please e-mail: journals.permissions@oup.com
ISSN
2050-0688
eISSN
2050-0696
DOI
10.1093/jaenfo/jnw005
Publisher site
See Article on Publisher Site

Abstract

ABSTRACTThe Chinese Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) has attracted much attention in recent years. There have been accusations of protectionism and of the AML being used to target foreign companies. Against this backdrop, the investigation by the National Development and Reform Commission (NDRC) against Qualcomm over the latter’s licensing practices was especially controversial. This was particularly so because China has long complained about the high licensing fees its domestic manufacturers have to pay to foreign patentees. And Qualcomm is a major licensor of communications technologies and earns a very considerable amount of licensing revenue in China. Qualcomm was eventually slapped the largest fine in the history of Chinese AML enforcement and subject to a number of behavioural remedies. The question arises as to whether the NDRC decision was a poorly reasoned protectionist venture or was in fact consistent with sound competition law principles. This article attempts to answer this question by critically evaluating the reasoning of the decision. It finds that even though the NDRC reached the correct conclusion on some of the claims, the analysis and the reasoning leave much to be desired.

Journal

Journal of Antitrust EnforcementOxford University Press

Published: Apr 1, 2017

There are no references for this article.