For at least three decades, the Supreme Court defined the necessary “economic power” that would involve almost any derogation from perfect competition, until the possession of a copyright, or even the very existence of a tie, gave rise to a presumption of economic power.  In the meantime, the Supreme Court decided that an applicant must determine the market power necessary for other cartel violations in order to demonstrate sufficient “economic power” to establish one.  More recently, the Court struck down any presumption of market power solely on the basis of patenting or copyright of the binder product.  The link is the “practice of a supplier of a product, the binder, which requires a buyer to purchase a second product, the related product.”  The commitment of a product can take many forms, contractual commitment when a contract requires the buyer to: Refuse to buy the two products together, refusal of delivery until the buyer agrees to buy both products, withdrawal or withholding of a warranty if the dominant seller only has the benefit of the guarantee when the seller accepts the purchase of that product the technical link occurs when the products of the dominant party are physically integrated and the purchase of one is impossible without the other and when two products are sold in the same package at a price. These practices are prohibited by Article 101, paragraph 1, point e) and Article 102, paragraph 2, point (d), and may terminate a violation of the statute if other conditions are met. It should be noted, however, that the Court of Justice is prepared to find an offence that goes beyond that of Article 102, paragraph 2, point (d), see Tetra Pak/Commission.  Some undertaking agreements are unlawful in the United States, both under the Sherman Antitrust Act and Section 3 of the Clayton Act.  A contract of engagement is defined as “an agreement of one party to sell a product, but only on the condition that the buyer purchases another product (or bound) or at least accepts that he does not purchase the product from another supplier.”  Engagement can be the activity of several companies as well as the work of a company. The success of a claim of commitment generally requires proof of four elements: (1) These are two distinct products or services; 2.
The purchase of the binding product depends on the additional purchase of the related product; (3) the seller has sufficient power in the binding product market; (4) A significant portion of intergovernmental trade in the related products market is affected.  Certain types of commitments, particularly contractual ones, have been considered anti-competitive practices in the past. The basic idea is that consumers are harmed by forcing them to buy an unwanted good (the linked property) to buy a property they actually want (binding it well) and, therefore, he would prefer that the goods be sold separately.