This is a graded discussion: $100$ points possible

Debate This: Antitrust $-$ Law Firm $9$

From Advanced Business Law

Debate this: The internet and the rise of e$-$commerce have rendered our antitrust concepts and laws obsolete.

Chapter $38$ page $914$

IMPORTANT NOTE$--$ You must post your initial response on the Friday of the assigned week and you must post a constructive critique to one of yo members by Sunday night of said week. You are not required to answer the Critical Thinking Question. You can integrate the fact pattern and the $9$ in order to support defend your arguments. I want to see an introduction, $3$ supporting arguments and a conclusion. Additionally, your response po analytical and value added and not simply repeat what you said in your first post. I want you to analyze and evaluate what a peer stated.

The Internet Corporation for Assigned Names and Numbers $($ICANN$)$ is a nonprofit entity that organizes Internet domain names. It is gover board of directors elected by various groups with commercial interests in the Internet. One of ICANN's functions is to authorize an entity t as a registrar for certain top$-$level domains $($TLDs$).$ ICANN entered into an agreement with VeriSign to provide registry services for the $".$con accordance with ICANN's specifications. VeriSign complained that ICANN was restricting the services that it could make available as a regis blocking new services, imposing unnecessary conditions on those services, and setting the prices at which the services were offered. VeriSi claimed that ICANN's control of the registry services for domain names violated Section $1$ of the Sherman Act.

Using the information presented in the chapter, you might want to consider the following questions when you answer the Debate this prom

Should ICANN's actions be judged under the rule of reason or be deemed a per se violation of Section $1$ of the Sherman Act? Explain.

Should ICANN's actions be viewed as a horizontal or a vertical restraint of trade? Explain.

Does it matter that ICANN's directors are chosen by groups with a commercial interest in the Internet? Why or why not?

If the dispute is judged under the rule of reason, what might be ICANN's defense for having a standardized set of registry services that mus used?