OECD-Korea Regional Centre for Competition Regional Antitrust Workshop on Abuse of Dominance. Case Study Regulation on Exclusive Dealing in Japan. Tsuyoshi OKUMURA Japan Fair Trade Commission. 11 October, 2006. Table of contents. 1. Backgrounds of the case against Intel KK (IJKK)
Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.
Regional Antitrust Workshop on Abuse of Dominance
Japan Fair Trade Commission
11 October, 2006
1. Backgrounds of the case against Intel KK (IJKK)
(1) Products concerned
(2) Related Entrepreneurs
(3) Situation of the CPU market in Japan
2. IJKK’s conducts and results
3. Application of the law
4. Elimination measures
CPUs concerned =“X86 series of CPU”
(one of CPUs using especially for Personal computer (PC))
Manufacturers of “X86 series of CPU” for PC manufacturers (OEMs) in the world
Advanced Micro Devices,Inc. (AMD)
Transmeta Corporation (Transmeta)(1) Products
Intel Kabushiki Kaisha (IJKK)
made by Intel Corporation
(fully owned subsidiary
of the Intel Corporation)
the Advanced Micro Devices,Inc.
(fully owned subsidiary of the Advanced Micro Devices,Inc.)
Outlet store etc
TransmetaDistribution channel of CPUs
Market share of IJKK and its competitors in 2002
（sales volume in 2002）
・AMD Japan and Transmeta
Japanese OEMs had shifted gradually from Intel’s CPU to AMD’s CPU.
Conducts of IJKK
→ Improve MSS (Market Segment Share) * for
each Japanese OEMs
* “MSS” is the ratio of the CPU manufactured and sold by Intel’s CPUs’ in the volume of CPUs to be incorporated into the PCs which manufactured and sold by a Japanese OEM.
Paid corresponding to purchase amount of CPUs from IJKK
Fund for promoting sales of Intel’s CPU
※ The total sales volume of IJKK, AMD Japan, and Transmeta to the 5 Japanese OEMs was approx 77% of the total domestic CPU sales volume
(a) the Japanese OEMs make MSS at 100% and refrain from adopting competitors’ CPUs.
(b) The Japanese OEMs make MSS at 90%, and put the ratio of competitors’ CPUs in the volume of CPUs to be incorporated into the PCs manufactured and sold by them down to 10%.
(c) The Japanese OEMs refrain from adopting competitors’ CPUs to be incorporated into PCs in more than one groups of PCs with comparatively large amount of production volume to others
MSS = 100%
Rebate and/or MDF
MSS = XY %
(100 - XY) %
Share of IJKK’s competitors
Dropped by 13% in a year
Section 3 of the Antimonopoly Act
“No entrepreneur shall effect private monopolization or unreasonable restraint of trade.”
The definition of “private monopolization” in the Antimonopoly Act
The term "private monopolization" as used in this Act shall mean such business activities, by which any entrepreneur, individually or by combination or conspiracy with other entrepreneurs, or by in any other manner, excludes or controls the business activities of other entrepreneurs, thereby causing, contrary to the public interest, a substantial restraint of competition in any particular field of trade.
(para 5, Section 2).
(December 9, 1953, Tokyo High Court)
Contents of the elimination measure