Final answer:
Dentsply's actions of preventing distributors from carrying competing brands is an example of anti-competitive practices or monopolistic behavior, which is typically prohibited under antitrust laws. Such behavior can lead to restricted competition and higher consumer prices.
Step-by-step explanation:
Dentsply, a dominant American maker of false teeth, unlawfully prevented independent distributors of false teeth from carrying competing brands. This action is an example of anti-competitive practices or monopolistic behavior. In business, especially in markets that resemble an oligopoly, companies may be tempted to collude in order to hold down industry output, charge higher prices, and share the profits.
Oligopolistic firms are known to face the temptation of collusion to act as a monopoly. Collusion can take various forms, including exclusive agreements, predatory pricing, or the formation of a cartel to limit competition and maintain high prices. When a firm, such as the given example of a large retailer, obtains exclusive rights to be a sole distributor, it often does so with the intention to deter competition, which is seen as an anti-competitive effect on the market.
In many jurisdictions, such practices are a violation of antitrust laws designed to foster competition and prevent monopolies. While the temptation to defy these laws for higher profits is strong, enforcement agencies actively work to identify and prosecute such behavior. These anti-competitive practices can lead to legal consequences and potentially harm consumer welfare by reducing choice and increasing prices.