Anti-Trust lawsuits aganist EA should be looming soon.

[PhilCrenshaw]

Its one thing to be upset about not having any more competition, another to talk about looming lawsuits when there is no chance they will happen.

PhilC

[Dice]

Unfortunately, if Sega, Microsoft, etc. files an Antitrust claim then EA could counter-sue if Sega's involved.

The class action lawsuit can materialize into the courts because EA, under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, made an attempt to monopolize a market.

On the other hand, EA can counter-sue because under Section 13a. under the Clayton Act Sega violated the price practices when they sold all their games for 20.00 last year.

As a poster just stated, Sega would have to go at this alone. And Sega needs to ask themselves: "Is it worth it?"

[Braylon]

Quote: Originally Posted by MrZone

I wouldn't be suprised if Take 2, 989 and Microsoft file it jointly, because they do have a strong case aganist EA, and if EA isn't careful, they could end up like Standard Oil COmpany, Visa/Mastercard. ATT, etc The 2 most glaring things I can see is: 1. Unfair Business Practices (how did EA get ESPN) 2. The potential elimation of competition.

There is nothing wrong with what EA did legally.
There is nothing that any of these companies can do legally.

Someone close this thread.

[ChicagoSparty]

Quote: Originally Posted by fossen

Not gonna happen. A) The market is not being cornered. The market here is videogames as a whole, sports games are too small to be considered a market.

I can see most of your other points, but this is incorrect. The definition of the relevant market can be very broad, very narrow, or anywhere in between.

[fossen]

Quote: Originally Posted by ChicagoSparty

I can see most of your other points, but this is incorrect. The definition of the relevant market can be very broad, very narrow, or anywhere in between.

So EA violated anti-trust laws by locking up the NASCAR sim market?

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by ChicagoSparty

I can see most of your other points, but this is incorrect. The definition of the relevant market can be very broad, very narrow, or anywhere in between.

EA is not cornering the market. Take Two is free to release a football game next year. Just not an NFL licensed game. EA's deal is a licensing agreement. Just because most people would prefer to purchase an NFL licensed game does not mean EA has a monopoly.

[aholbert32]

Quote: Originally Posted by Dice

Unfortunately, if Sega, Microsoft, etc. files an Antitrust claim then EA could counter-sue if Sega's involved. The class action lawsuit can materialize into the courts because EA, under Section 2 of the Sherman Act, made an attempt to monopolize a market. On the other hand, EA can counter-sue because under Section 13a. under the Clayton Act Sega violated the price practices when they sold all their games for 20.00 last year. As a poster just stated, Sega would have to go at this alone. And Sega needs to ask themselves: "Is it worth it?"

How did EA attempt to create a monopoly? How are they preventing Sega from releasing a football game next year?

[Rhudey]

As much as I think it is bad news, it's also not EA's doing. Blame the NFL and NFLPA, they are the ones who sold their rights to only one company. What was EA supposed to do, let Sega buy them?