prefer a gentler approach that mirrors the NCRPA's reductions in
agreements submitted in connection with the NCRPA. (257) Moreover, if
By virtue of the Standards Development Organization Advancement Act of 2004, the antitrust protections of the National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993 (NCRPA) are now extended to standards development organizations, defined as "a domestic or international organization that plans, develops, establishes, or coordinates voluntary consensus standards using procedures that incorporate the attributes of openness, balance of interests, due process, an appeals process, and consensus in a manner consistent with the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular Number A-119, as revised February 10, 1998." This rather broad definition includes associations.
In addition, according to the circular, the term standard or technical standard, as cited in NCRPA, includes
The report concludes that the NCRA and the NCRPA have had limited success.
Yet, there has been criticism of the NCRPA for its failure to adequately limit antitrust litigation and prevent potential exposure by private plaintiffs to treble-damage liability.
Under the NCRPA, California Dental and a "next generation" rule of reason, covered next, the legal form of the "combination"(17) by itself becomes irrelevant, and is reconnected to an analysis of competition itself.
The 1993 House Report on the NCRPA explained how the "costs of developing new technology and bringing it to the marketplace may exceed the resources of any single firm," and how "short product life-cycles" and the need for "rapid response to consumer demands" favor joint ventures.(32)
Thus the NCRPA
has been associated with rapid growth in the formation of research consortia and/or the propensity to register these associations formally to obtain lower private antitrust damages.
At the time of enactment of first the NCRA and then the 1993 Amendments,(25) some commentary appeared pointing out the various provisions of the statutes, presenting the definitions given in the statutes, and flagging the terms for which further (or any) definition was still needed.(26) Several commentators noted that, although the Acts were intended to clarify the antitrust treatment of joint ventures, they in fact left much unclear.(27) Such commentators indicated that interested parties would have to wait to see how the courts and agencies would apply the Acts, in order to learn their reach and potential effect.(28) Six years after the amendment of the NCRA into the NCRPA
, it appears that any parties still interested are still waiting.
has two major technology policy goals: to increase the number of joint R&D and production ventures entered into by U.S.
The National Cooperative Research and Production Act of 1993 (NCRPA
),(179) which is a 1993 amendment to a 1984 law, contains specific congressional findings that reflect today's reality and appear to profoundly change antitrust joint venture law.