incompatible with the internal market in so far as it may afect trade between Member States. Such abuse may, in particular, consist in: (a) directly or indirectly imposing unfair purchase or selling prices or other unfair trading conditions; (b) limiting production, markets or technical development to the prejudice of consumers; (c) applying dissimilar conditions to equivalent transactions with other trading parties, thereby placing them at a competitive disadvantage; (d) making the conclusion of contracts subject to acceptance by the other parties of supplementary obligations which, by their nature or according to commercial usage, have no connection with the subject of such contracts.” If a company that holds a position of strength (dominance) in a particular market were to abuse that position (for example by charging customers excessively high prices), it would cause harm to consumers and competitors alike. This is why such behaviour is prohibited under EU competition law. One of the most prominent cases of abuse of dominant position culminated in the 2004 Microsoft Decision, Case COMP/C-3/37.792. The Commission found that Microsoft had abused its dominant position in PC operating systems by withholding critical interoperability information from its competitors, meaning that providers of rival operating systems were unable to compete efectively. A dominant position is ‘a position of economic strength enjoyed by an undertaking which enables it to prevent efective competition being maintained on the relevant market by giving it the power to behave to an appreciable extent independently of its competitors, customers and
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MTE4NzM5Nw==