Talk:Legal monopoly

[Untitled][edit]

A big mac is a bad example of a "Monopoly". This is really bad wording. They have a copyright on the term "big mac" but not a monopoly on hamburgers. I can still go buy a whopper or other fast food burger. You have a monopoly when you hold the overwhelming market share for an item. McDonald's does not own the overwhelming market share of fast food burgers.

I've changed the example to make it a better indication of a legal monopoly. AT&T as a local exchange monopoly (until 1984) is a pretty famous example, and public utility regulation is a good context under which to understand the idea of legal monopoly. Hopefully that works better.

def. of legal monopoly[edit]

A monopoly is legally defined as having a certain percentage of the market share (so its not necessarily that they are the ONLY seller - I think the article gets this right). A legal monopoly can be one that has been built and maintained by a private entity w/o any govt intervention or influence (not just one that is "exempted" by the govt). There are many examples of this. Monopolies are subject to stricter antitrust guidelines (e.g. can't sell below cost, price fix, etc...)

see:

http://www.ftc.gov/bc/compguide/maintain.htm

and if you can find the "legal def" (% of market share) also more pwr to you.

Thanks. --SchoobieDoobieDo 02:37, 12 February 2007 (UTC)[reply]

How is this different than Government-granted monopoly? I would understand if a legal monopoly was a monopoly that was simply allowed to exist while a government-granted monopoly was one where the government specifically protected the company from competition, but the two articles do not make any distinction. 163.231.6.86 17:28, 25 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]