反垄断法及案例分析国别实施主体反垄断法组成执法队伍特征美国司法部反托拉斯司; 美国联邦贸易委员会; 各州政府和民间主体反托拉斯法克莱顿法联邦贸易委员会法专家型、终身制日本公正交易委员会禁止垄断法不正当赠品及不正当表示防止法承包合同法设事务总局，目前人员650 人欧盟欧共体委员会欧共体法院欧共体竞争法竞争局大约有450名工作人员，其中200 名是经济学和法学领域的家。

德国联邦卡特尔局垄断委员会联邦经济与科技部反限制竞争法工作人员约250 人，其中110人拥有法律或经济学学位，任高级主管美国：《保护贸易和商业不受非法限制与垄断之害法》(An Act to Protect Trade and Commerce against Unlawful Restraintsand Monopolies )简称《谢尔曼法》(Sherman Act)欧盟European Union欧盟委员会-竞争总局Competition Directorate General / The Eupopean Commission欧共体条约The Treaty Establishing European Community中国反垄断法平等地适用于市场主体即经营者适用范围中国反垄断法对横向垄断协议和纵向垄断协议分别做出了禁止规定。

关于垄断协议中国反垄断法不反对经营者具有市场支配地位，但严格禁止其滥用市场支配地位实施排除、限制竞争，损害消费者利益的垄断行为。

关于滥用市场支配地位中国反垄断法第五章对滥用行政权力排除、限制竞争行为进行了专门规定关于滥用行政权力中国反垄断法鼓励经营者通过依法实施集中等方式做大做强，同时依法规制经营者集中行为关于经营者集中微软可口可乐波音Microsoft Corporation (NASDAQ:MSFT and NYSE:MSFT) is an American public multinational corporation headquartered in Redmond, Washington, USA that develops, manufactures, licenses, and supports a wide range of products and services predominantly related to computing through its various product divisions1>. Established on April 4, 1975 to develop and sell BASIC interpreters for the Altair 8800, Microsoft rose to dominate the home computer operating system market with MS-DOS in the mid-1980s, followed by the Microsoft Windows line of operating systems.Microsoft CorporationHistory Government interest in Microsoft's affairs had begun in 1991 with an inquiry by the Federal Trade Commission over whether Microsoft was abusing its monopoly on the PCoperating system market. The commissioners deadlocked with a 2-2 vote in 1993 and closed the investigation, but the Department of Justice opened its own investigation on August 21 of that year, resulting in a settlement on July 15, 1994 in which Microsoft consented not to tie other Microsoft products to the sale of Windowsbut remained free to integrate additional features into the operating system. In the years that followed, Microsoft insisted that Internet Explorer (which first appeared in the Plus! Pack sold separately from Windows 95) was not a product but a feature which it was allowed to add to Windows, although the DOJ did not agree with this definition.CONCLUSIONS OF LAWThe United States, nineteen individual states, and the District of Columbia (;the plaintiffs;) bring these consolidated civil enforcement actions against defendant Microsoft Corporation (;Microsoft;) under the Sherman Antitrust Act, 15 U.S.C. §§ 1 and 2. The plaintiffs charge, inessence, that Microsoft has waged an unlawful campaign in defense of its monopoly position in the market for operating systems designed to run on Intel-compatible personal computers (;PCs;). Specifically, the plaintiffs contend that Microsoft violated§2 of the Sherman Act by engaging in a series of exclusionary, anticompetitive, and predatory acts to maintain its monopoly power. They also assert that Microsoft attempted, albeit unsuccessfully to date, to monopolize the Web browser market,taken by Microsoft as part of its campaign to protect its monopoly power, namely tying its browser to its operating system and entering into exclusive dealing arrangements, violated § 1 of the Act.Uponconsideration of the Court's Findings of Fact (;Findings;), filed herein on November 5, 1999, as amended on December 21, 1999, the proposed conclusions of law submitted by the parties, the briefs of amici curiae, and the argument of counsel thereon, the Court concludes that Microsoft maintained its monopoly power by anticompetitive means and attempted to monopolize the Web browser market, both inlikewise in violation of §2. Finally, they contend tha t certain steps violation of §2. Microsoft also violated § 1 of the Sherman Act by unlawfully tyingits Web browser to its operating system. The facts found do not support the conclusion, however, that the effect of Microsoft's marketing arrangements with other companies constituted unlawful exclusive dealing under criteria established by leading decisions under § 1.The nineteen states and the District of Columbia (;the plaintiff states;) seek to ground liability additionally under their respective antitrust laws. The Court is persuaded that the evidence in the record proving violations of the Sherman Act also satisfies the elements of analogous causes of action arising under the laws of each plaintiff state. For this reason, and for others stated below, the Court holds Microsoft liable under those particular state laws as well.Microsoft Corporation其他高新技术公司反垄断案英特尔公司反垄断案2007年7月27 日，欧盟起诉因特尔恶意垄断市场，理由是英特尔利用其在处理器市场的垄断地位，逼迫其在全球多达38 家客户签署排它性协议；2009年年底美国贸易委员会（FTC）起诉因特尔，称因特尔故意打压竞争对手，减少竞争对手的芯片被采购机会。