United States v. AT&T
E177030
United States v. AT&T was a landmark antitrust lawsuit in which the U.S. government forced the breakup of the Bell System telecommunications monopoly in the early 1980s.
All labels observed (8)
How this entity was disambiguated
This entity first appeared as the object of triple T1565721 — resolving that mention is where its identity was fixed. The disambiguator weighed these candidate entities and picked the highlighted one (or “None”, minting a new entity). This is how homonymy is resolved: the same surface form can point to different entities.
NED1
Entity disambiguation (via context triple)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. AT&T Context triple: [Bell System, dissolutionLegalBasis, United States v. AT&T]
-
A.
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation is a landmark 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the government's authority to regulate indecent material on public airwaves, stemming from a radio broadcast of George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" monologue.
-
B.
United States v. Comstock
United States v. Comstock is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s authority to civilly commit mentally ill, sexually dangerous federal prisoners beyond their release date under the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause.
-
C.
Lorance v. AT&T Technologies, Inc.
Lorance v. AT&T Technologies, Inc. is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court employment discrimination case that restricted when workers could challenge discriminatory seniority systems, prompting Congress to overturn its effect through the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
-
D.
United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association
United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association is a landmark 1944 U.S. Supreme Court case that held insurance transactions across state lines are subject to federal regulation under the Commerce Clause.
-
E.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
- F. None of above. chosen
- G. Unsure - the case is ambiguous/there is not enough information to decide.
NED2
Entity disambiguation (via description)
gpt-5-mini-2025-08-07
Target entity: United States v. AT&T Target entity description: United States v. AT&T was a landmark antitrust lawsuit in which the U.S. government forced the breakup of the Bell System telecommunications monopoly in the early 1980s.
-
A.
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation
FCC v. Pacifica Foundation is a landmark 1978 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld the government's authority to regulate indecent material on public airwaves, stemming from a radio broadcast of George Carlin's "Seven Dirty Words" monologue.
-
B.
United States v. Comstock
United States v. Comstock is a 2010 U.S. Supreme Court case that upheld Congress’s authority to civilly commit mentally ill, sexually dangerous federal prisoners beyond their release date under the Constitution’s Necessary and Proper Clause.
-
C.
Lorance v. AT&T Technologies, Inc.
Lorance v. AT&T Technologies, Inc. is a 1989 U.S. Supreme Court employment discrimination case that restricted when workers could challenge discriminatory seniority systems, prompting Congress to overturn its effect through the Civil Rights Act of 1991.
-
D.
United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association
United States v. South-Eastern Underwriters Association is a landmark 1944 U.S. Supreme Court case that held insurance transactions across state lines are subject to federal regulation under the Commerce Clause.
-
E.
United States v. Eichman
United States v. Eichman is a 1990 U.S. Supreme Court case that struck down a federal law banning flag desecration as unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s protection of free speech.
- F. None of above. chosen
Statements (47)
| Predicate | Object |
|---|---|
| instanceOf |
United States federal court case
ⓘ
antitrust lawsuit ⓘ landmark telecommunications case ⓘ |
| category |
United States antitrust case
ⓘ
United States telecommunications case ⓘ |
| concerns |
Bell System
ⓘ
telecommunications monopoly ⓘ |
| country |
United States
ⓘ
linked to:
United States of America
|
| court | United States District Court for the District of Columbia ⓘ |
| effect |
end of AT&T’s monopoly over U.S. local telephone service
ⓘ
increased competition in U.S. telecommunications ⓘ opening of equipment markets to competition ⓘ opening of long‑distance markets to competition ⓘ restructuring of U.S. telephone industry ⓘ structural separation of long‑distance and local telephone services ⓘ |
| enforcedBy | U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division ⓘ |
| filedBy |
U.S. Department of Justice
ⓘ
linked to:
United States Department of Justice
|
| hasDefendant | American Telephone and Telegraph Company ⓘ |
| hasParty |
American Telephone and Telegraph Company
ⓘ
United States of America ⓘ |
| hasPlaintiff | United States of America ⓘ |
| industry | telecommunications ⓘ |
| judge | Harold H. Greene ⓘ |
| legalArea |
antitrust law
ⓘ
competition law ⓘ |
| legalClaim |
anticompetitive practices in telecommunications
ⓘ
monopolization under U.S. antitrust law ⓘ |
| location | Washington, D.C. ⓘ |
| regulatorInvolved | Federal Communications Commission ⓘ |
| relatedTo |
AT&T Corporation
ⓘ
linked to:
American Telephone and Telegraph Company
Bell Operating Companies ⓘ Regional Bell Operating Companies ⓘ |
| result |
breakup of the Bell System
ⓘ
creation of Regional Bell Operating Companies ⓘ divestiture of AT&T local telephone companies ⓘ modification of final judgment (MFJ) ⓘ |
| settlementType | consent decree ⓘ |
| shortName |
U.S. v. AT&T
ⓘ
linked to:
United States v. AT&T
|
| significance |
key event in deregulation of U.S. telecommunications
ⓘ
major precedent for structural remedies in antitrust enforcement ⓘ often cited as a classic breakup of a regulated monopoly ⓘ |
| subjectMatter |
local telephone service
ⓘ
long‑distance telephone service ⓘ network interconnection ⓘ telecommunications equipment ⓘ |
| timePeriod |
early 1980s
ⓘ
late 1970s ⓘ |
How these facts were elicited
The pipeline generated the facts above by prompting gpt-5.1 with this entity's name + description and the instruction below.
Instruction
You are a knowledge base construction expert. Given a subject entity and a description of it, return factual statements that you know for the subject as a JSON list of dictionaries(triples), where keys must be "subject", "predicate" and "object". The number of facts may be very high, between 25 to 50 or more, for very popular subjects. For less popular subjects, the number of facts can be very low, like 5 or 10. # Requirements - If you don't know the subject at all, return an empty list. - If the subject is not a named entity, return an empty list. - Include at least one triple where predicate is "instanceOf". - Do not get too wordy. - Separate several objects into multiple triples with one object.
Input
Subject: United States v. AT&T Description of subject: United States v. AT&T was a landmark antitrust lawsuit in which the U.S. government forced the breakup of the Bell System telecommunications monopoly in the early 1980s.
Referenced by (16)
Full triples — surface form annotated when it differs from this entity's canonical label.
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T
linked to: United States v. AT&T