FACT THAT EXPO DENTAL IS HELD EVERY 18 MONTHS AND TO THE RATE AT WHICH TECHNICAL PROGRESS IS MADE IN THE RELEVANT PRODUCTS TOGETHER WITH THE EXCEPTIONS ALLOWED FOR OPEN-HOUSE TYPE EXHIBITIONS AND EXHIBITIONS CONNECTED WITH SPECIALIZED CONGRESSES , THE PERIOD OF NINE MONTHS PROHIBITION OUT OF EVERY 18 CAN REASONABLY BE REGARDED AS INDISPENSABLE .
5 . THE UNIDI DECISION DOES NOT ELIMINATE COMPETITION BETWEEN ORGANIZERS OF EXHIBITIONS OF DENTAL EQUIPMENT NOR BETWEEN MANUFACTURERS AND DISTRIBUTORS OF SUCH EQUIPMENT .
ORGANIZERS OF EXHIBITIONS OTHER THAN EXPO DENTAL CAN , DURING NINE MONTHS OUT OF EVERY 18 , ORGANIZE EXHIBITIONS AT WHICH ANY INTERESTED PARTY CAN EXHIBIT , AND DURING THE OTHER MONTHS THEY ARE FREE TO HOLD EXHIBITIONS WITH THE PARTICIPATION OF FIRMS WHO DO NOT TAKE PART IN EXPO DENTAL . FURTHERMORE , AS FAR AS THE COMMISSION IS AWARE , IT IS ONLY ASSOCIATIONS OF SPECIALISTS WHICH HAVE HITHERTO ORGANIZED SUCH EXHIBITIONS . SUCH ASSOCIATIONS REMAIN FREE TO ORGANIZE EXHIBITIONS IN CONNECTION WITH SPECIALIZED CONGRESSES OR SYMPOSIA AT WHICH ALL MANUFACTURERS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIVES ARE FREE TO EXHIBIT .
WITH REGARD TO COMPETITION BETWEEN MANUFACTURERS AND DISTRIBUTORS OF DENTAL PRODUCTS , PARTICIPATION IN SPECIALIZED EXHIBITIONS IS , AS CAN BE SEEN FROM PART I ABOVE , ONLY ONE OF THE VARIOUS METHODS OF MARKETING . THE FACT THAT DURING NINE MONTHS OUT OF EVERY 18 THEY ARE OBLIGED TO ADOPT OTHER METHODS DOES NOT RESULT IN THE ELIMINATION OF COMPETITION BETWEEN THEM .
6 . ACCORDINGLY , ALL THE TESTS FOR EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) ARE SATISFIED .
IV
1 . THE ORIGINAL VERSION OF THE UNIDI DECISION DID NOT QUALIFY FOR EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) . THE PROHIBITION ON PARTICIPATION IN OTHER SIMILAR EXHIBITIONS WAS IN EFFECT VALID FOR 12 MONTHS OUT OF EVERY 12 , WHICH GAVE UNIDI A VIRTUAL MONOPOLY OF DENTAL EXHIBITIONS IN ITALY . FURTHERMORE , SINCE IT MADE NO EXCEPTIONS FOR EXHIBITIONS CONNECTED WITH SPECIALIZED CONGRESSES OR SYMPOSIA , THE RESULT WAS THAT FIRMS MANUFACTURING EITHER GENERAL OR SPECIALIZED DENTAL EQUIPMENT COULD NOT PRESENT THEIR PRODUCT RANGES ON THESE TWO DISTINCT MARKETS . COMPETITION , THEREFORE , BETWEEN THE ORGANIZERS OF EXHIBITIONS AND THE MANUFACTURERS AND DISTRIBUTORS OF DENTAL EQUIPMENT WAS RESTRICTED TO AN EXTENT WHICH THE BENEFITS OF THE EXPO DENTAL SCHEME COULD NOT JUSTIFY .
AS STATED IN PART I ABOVE , UNIDI ADOPTED A DECISION ON 25 JULY 1974 IN RESPONSE TO REPRESENTATIONS BY THE COMMISSION BY WHICH THE RULES GOVERNING FUTURE EXPO DENTAL EXHIBITIONS , IN PARTICULAR ARTICLE 22 , WERE AMENDED TO COMPLY WITH ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) . IT IS , THEREFORE , ONLY FROM THAT DATE THAT THE TESTS FOR EXEMPTION UNDER ARTICLE 85 ( 3 ) HAVE BEEN SATISFIED .
2 . IN DETERMINING THE PERIOD OF VALIDITY OF THIS DECISION , AS REQUIRED BY ARTICLE 8 ( 1 ) OF REGULATION NO 17 , ACCOUNT MUST BE TAKEN OF THE NATURE OF THE CASE AND