Ahlborn, C., D. Evans and J. Padilla (2004), 'The antitrust economics of tying', 49, Antitrust Bulletin, 287-341.
Ahlborn, C., D. Bailey and H. Crossley (2005), 'An antitrust analysis of tying: position paper'.
Areeda, P. and H. Hovenkamp (2004), Fundamentals of Antitrust Law.
Art, J.-Y. and G. McCurdy (2004), 'The European Commission's media player remedy in its Microsoft decision: compulsory code removal despite the absence of tying or foreclosure', 11, European Competition Law Review, 694.
Bork, R. (1978), The Antitrust Paradox, New York: Free Press.
Carlton,D. and M.Waldman (2005), 'How economics can improve antitrust doctrine towards tie-in sales', 1, Comp. Policy Int'l, 27.
Council of Ministers of the European Union, Council Regulation (EC) No 1/2003 of 16 December 2002 on the Implementation of the Rules on Competition Laid Down in Articles 81 and 82 of the Treaty, OJ (2003) L1/1.
Dolmans, M. and T. Graf (2004), 'Analysis of tying under Article 82 EC: the European Commission's Microsoft decision in perspective', 27, World Competition, 225.
Easterbrook, Frank H. (1984), 'The limits of antitrust', 63, Texas L. Rev., reprinted in 1,Competition Policy Int'l, 179, at p. 188 (2005).
Economic Advisory Group for Competition Policy (2005), 'An economic approach to Article 82' available at: http://europa.eu.int/comm/competition/publications/studies/eagcp_july_21_05.pdf.
Evans, D. and J. Padilla (2004), 'Tying under Article 82 EC and the Microsoft decision: a comment on Dolmans and Graf', 27, World Competition, 503.
Evans, D. and M. Salinger (2005), 'Why do firms bundle and tie? Evidence from competitive markets and implications for tying law', 22, Yale Journal on Regulation, 37.
Evans, D., J. Padilla and M. Polo (2002), 'Tying in platform software: reasons for a rule-ofreason standard in European competition law', 25, World Competition, 509.
Furse, M. (2004), 'Article 82, Microsoft and bundling, or "the half monti" ', Competition Law, 169.
Grimes,W. (2002), 'The antitrust tying law schism: a critique of Microsoft III and a response to Hylton and Salinger', 70, Antitrust L. J., 199.
Heiner, D. (2005), 'Assessing tying claims in the context of software integration: a suggested framework for applying the rule-of-reason analysis', 72, Univ. of Chicago L. Rev., 123.
Hylton, K. and M. Salinger (2001), 'Tying law and policy: a decision-theoretic approach', 69, Antitrust L. J., 469.
Hylton, K. and M. Salinger (2002), 'Reply to Grimes: illusory distinctions and schisms in tying law', 70, Antitrust L. J., 231.
Kroes, Neelie (23 September 2005), 'Preliminary thoughts on policy review of Article 82', Fordham Corporate Law Institute, available online at the following website: http://europa.eu.int/rapid/pressReleasesAction.do?referenceSPEECH/05/537&formatHTML&aged0&languageEN&guiLanguageen.
Kuhn, K.-U., R. Stillman and C. Caffarra (2005), 'Economic theories of bundling and their policy implications in abuse cases: an assessment in light of the Microsoft case', European Competition Journal, 85.
Nalebuff, B. (2005), 'Tied and true exclusion', 1, Comp. Policy Int'l, 41.
Nalebuff, B. and D. Majerus (2003), 'Bundling, tying, and portfolio effects', DTI Economics Paper No. 1.
Ridyard, D. (2005), 'Tying and bundling - cause for complaint?', 6, European Competition Law Review, 316.
Reeves, T. and N. Dodoo (2005), 'Standards of proof and standards of judicial review in EC merger law', Fordham Corporate Law Institute.
Tirole, J. (2005), 'The analysis of tying cases: a primer', 1, Comp. Policy Int'l, 1.
Vesterdorf, B. (March 2005), 'Standard of proof in merger cases: reflections in the light of recent case law of the Community Courts', European Competition Journal, 3.
