format.
In the original version of this paper Theorem 1.1 was mistakenly
stated for all p. This was also observed by Pikhurko [Pi01] and
by Schelp. The theorem is valid only in the linear, quadratic and
cubic cases. Namely:

Let k > 2 be a positive integer, and let p=1,2,3. Then
t_p(n,K_k)=e_p(T(n,k)), where T(n,k) is the Turán Graph.

Theorem 1.1 is sharp in the sense that for p \geq 4, t_p(n,K_k) is
*not* obtained by the Turán graph. This can already be seen by
the fact that the complete bipartite graph G=K_{\lfloor n/2-1
\rfloor, \lceil n/2+1 \rceil} has e_4(G) > e_4(T(n,3)).

A revised version of this paper addressing this comment can be found
in [CaYu04].

#### References

[CaYu04] Y. Caro and R. Yuster,
*A Turán Type Problem Concerning the Powers of the Degrees
of a Graph (revised)*
arXiv:math.CO/0401398 (2004).

[Pi01] O. Pikhurko,
*Remarks on a paper of Y. Caro and R. Yuster on a Turán problem*
arXiv:math.CO/0101235 (2001).