ヴァージニア大学研究記/USA for a Young Lawyer from Japan
Drafted by Dr. Akira Inoue |
| MASTER'S THESIS |
Thomas Jeffersonの自宅であったMonticello |
May 18, 2005 おかげさまで、小職のUVAにおける研究の集大成ともいえる修士論文を完成させることが出来ました。修士論文の概要につきましては、下記のABSTRACTをご参照いただきたいのですが、B２Bに対する競争法的検討、B2B上で発生しやすい買手寡占市場についての経済学的検討、Oligopsony
Agreementに対する米国における法的対応、日本の独占禁止法第２条６項の解釈上、Oligopsony
Agreementに対して、どのようなアプローチが可能であるのか、Oligopsony Agreementを間接事実、状況証拠から認定する際に考慮可能なファクターにはどのようなものがあるのかといった諸点を検討させていただきました。
Oligopsony Agreementを間接事実、状況証拠を元に認定した事例は米国でもまだ存在しないのですが、Oligopsony
Agreementがworkするためには、経済学的要因として不可欠な要素があり、かかる要素が存在し、かつ、市場における購入価格がcompetitive
levelより低下している場合には、Oligopsony Agreementを認定しやすいといえます。B2Bの管理者としては、このような経済学的要因が存在していることを知り、または合理的な努力を払えば知ることが出来たにも関わらず放置をしていた場合には、Suppliersに対して法的責任を負担しなければならない可能性が発生してきてしまいます。逆に、B2B市場を管理者としては、当該経済学的要因を消滅させるために合理的な努力を払っておけば、市場の管理者としての法的責任を回避できる可能性が高くなるといえます。小職の修士論文では、市場の管理者の法的責任について、深い検討をすることが出来ませんでしたが、今後の課題として更に研究を深めたいと思います。
また、Regular Bargaining PowerとOligopsony Powerの相違については、独占禁止法的な観点からの検討を十分に積むことが出来たのですが、経済学的検討については、更に検討を深める余地があると考えています。小職の修士論文で検討しているMarket
SpoilageをExploitするための、bargainingは、illegal exercise of market power
のジャンルというよりも、regular bargaining powerのジャンルであり、したがって、per
se approachが妥当しないという結論がよりストレートに導き出せるのではないかと考えております。この点についても、更に、研究を深めたいと思います。
|
C'villeから２００マイルほど離れたGettysburgのBattle Field。南北戦争の最後の決戦地で、多くの史跡が保存されていました。 |
C'villeから１８０マイルほど離れたBaltimoreのInner Harborの一風景 |
以下、小職の、修士論文のABSTRACTです。
AUTHOR
Akira Inoue
SUPERVISING PROFESSOR
Charles J. Goetz
ABSTRACT
B2B is a business-to-business market place that uses internet to connect
each other business. It has gotten a lot more attention recently in Japan
as well as in the U.S. because it is possible to lower the procurement
costs of raw material and accomplish several procompetitive effects such
as communication efficiencies. However, in spite of these
pro transactional natures of B2B, it could also cause anticompetitive effects
on market place. In other words, the fact that buyers communicate easily
through the internet means they could easily form a cartel or conclude an
agreement to restrain the free competition and it is easy to detect deviation
from those agreements. There must have been buyers’ anticompetitive agreements
long before B2B and these agreements were concluded without using the internet-based
communication. However, the potential for B2B to aid buyers’ agreements is
worth to get attention. Despite this importance, there have been little
cases and studies concerning buyers’ agreement even in the U.S. and, in Japan,
there have been neither cases nor the detail examination by the governmental
agencies about buyers’ anticompetitive agreements. This is because traditionally
sellers have had a strong bargaining power over purchasers. Therefore, little
attention has been focused on anticompetitive effects which might be caused by
buyers’ agreements. The internet, however, drastically changed the bargaining
power balance between sellers and purchasers. It has made possible for
purchasers to form a cartel to decrease the input purchased and lower the price
through the web-based communication. The paper examines the
competitive aspects of B2B from the view point of the antitrust law and
analyzes oligopsony, that is, buyers’ collusion to exercise their market power to decrease the price of the products they are going to buy from suppliers by depressing the quantity of input purchased artificially.Drawing on microeconomic theory and antitrust law, the interdisciplinary
work in the paper explores the implications of oligopsony, or buying power,
for antitrust policy. The paper offers a systematic treatment of the topic,
demonstrating that whether or not oligopsony power exists because of a
dominant buyer or collusion among buyers, it can cause social welfare losses
analogous to those occasioned by monopoly. The paper also discusses bilateral
monopoly and offers a principled basis for distinguishing between socially
desirable and undesirable cooperative buying. In addition, the paper analyzes the legal response to an oligopsony agreement
in the U.S. as well as in Japan in order to examine how an oligopsony agreement
should be treated. Further, the paper discusses tangential facts and circumstantial
evidence to find an oligopsony agreement, because, in the antitrust practice,
whether or not it is possible to find an agreement is sometimes the decisive
point. The paper tries to provide the practical precepts to find an agreement
which would be concluded on B2B. |
United States of Americaの国歌 "Star-Spangled Banner”の発祥地であるBaltimoreのFort
McHenry。１８１４年の米英戦争では、この地が激戦地でした。 |
MarrylandのState CapitalであるAnnapolis。独立当初は、この地がアメリカ合衆国の首都でした。現在では、古きアメリカの趣を残す小都市です。 |
| Record of Study at University of Virginia |
|
Virginia Top Page |
| 2004.8.15 |
Arriving at Charlottesville |
| 2004.9.11 |
Fall Semester Has Started |
| 2004.10.16 |
Respire to Have Fall Break |
| 2004.11.7 |
Red Leaves in Charlottesville |
| 2004.12.20 |
Merry Christmas in Charlottesville |
| 2005.1.22 |
Snow Fall in Charlottesville |
| 2005.3.5 |
Japanese Antitrust Regulation of Cartels |
| 2005.3.20 |
Spring Break at UVA |
| 2005.3.28 |
The Southern Hospitality |
| 2005.4.8 |
Spring Has Come at Charlottesville |
| 2005.4.18 |
LL.M. CONFERENCE 2005 |
| 2005.5.8 |
Final Examination at UVA |
| 2005.5.22 |
Commencement at UVA |
| 2006.6.27 |
Swearing in Ceremony at Albany |
| Record of My Study after University of Virginia |
| 2007.8.2 |
Ph.D. Degree at Chuo University |
