footnote__3

COMMUNICATION FROM THE COMMISSION Commission Notice on the definition of the relevant market for the purposes of Union competition law · European Union

This can give rise to the so-called ‘cellophane fallacy’, named after the US Supreme Court’s market definition involving cellophane and other wrapping products (United States v. E. I. du Pont de Nemours & Co., 351 U.S. 377 (1956)). It entails wrongly concluding, on the basis of a SSNIP test applied at the prevailing price, that the relevant market must be wider than the product(s) of a dominant undertaking (see the explanations of this concept in case AT.39523 Slovak Telekom, paragraphs 158 to 171). The cellophane fallacy can also arise when prices are set at supra-competitive levels because of joint profit maximisation by a group of undertakings.

← ntr55-C_202401645EN.000101-E0055 · All articles · footnote__4 →

Source: EUR-Lex (Cellar) · retrieved 2026-09-07 · Text as adopted (Official Journal); later amendments are not incorporated in this text.