The guidelines on enforcement priorities under section 102 specify the circumstances under which measures are appropriate to combat fixing practices. First, it must be determined whether the business being sued has a dominant position in the related or related product market. The next step will be to determine whether the dominant company has linked two different products. This is important because two identical products cannot be considered to be linked in accordance with Article 102, paragraph 2, point d), which states that products are considered to be linked if they are not linked “because of their nature or commercial use.” This is what happens in the legal definition of what boils down to attachment in scenarios of selling cars with tires or selling a car with a radio. Accordingly, the Commission provides guidelines in this regard by referring to Microsoft[32] and noting that “two products are separated if, without commitment or consolidation, a large number of customers would have purchased or purchased the binding product without even purchasing the product linked to the same supplier, which would allow independent production for both the link and the related product. The next question is whether the customer was obliged to purchase both related and related products, as proposed in Article 102, paragraph 2, paragraph (d): “to make contracts conditional on the acceptance of additional obligations by the other parties.” In the case of a contract, it is clear that the test will be completed; See Microsoft[35] for a non-contractual link. In addition, for a company that must be considered anti-competitive, the question of whether the tie can have a lock-in effect. [36] Some examples of anti-competitive coupling practices in the case law are IBM[37] , Eurofix-Bauco/Hilti[38], Telemarketing v CLT[39], British Sugar[40] and Microsoft. Therefore, the replacement effect of the dominant undertaking is to provide that the commitment is objectively justified or improves efficiency, and the Commission is prepared to consider claims that could lead to economic efficiency in production or distribution that benefit consumers. [42] A typical commitment agreement is when a seller with market power for a product (the “binding” item) asks any customer who purchases that item to purchase a second item (the “linked” item).