Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Many forms of business conduct have been attacked as predatory since the passage of the Sherman Act' in 1890.Neither the courts 2 nor legal and economic scholars, 3 however, agree on a general definition of predatory behavior.Section I of this paper presents a definition of predation' that is economically sound, judicially workable, and broadly applicable to a wide variety of business practices.Section II shows how the well-known costbased tests for predatory pricing can be derived from this general standard.It also clarifies these cost-based tests, and expands their applicability to encompass multi-product firms.Sections III-V contain the most novel aspect of this paper-the derivation from our general standard of specific tests that distinguish between predatory and procompetitive product innovations.These sections argue that even genuine innovations-new products that in some ways are superior to existing products in the eyes of both engineers and consumers-are in some circumstances anticompetitive.Such innovations do not provide benefits to consumers that are worth the cost, and are motivated solely by * This article is a substantially revised and expanded version of our paper, An Economic Definition of Predatory Product Innovation, in STRATEGY, PREDATION, AND ANTITRUST ANALYSIS (S.Salop ed.
Ordover et al. (Sun,) studied this question.