Regulating the Regulators: Guidance for the FTC’s Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Authority
August 1, 2013
We’ve had a great day considering the possibility, and potential contours, of guidelines for implementing the FTC’s “unfair methods of competition” (UMC) authority. Many thanks to our invited participants and to TOTM readers who took the time to follow today’s posts. There’s lots of great stuff here, so be sure to read anything you missed. And please continue to comment on posts. A great thing about a blog symposium is that the discussion need not end immediately. We hope to continue the conversation over the next few days.
I’m tempted to make some observations about general themes, points of (near) consensus, open questions, etc., but I won’t do that because we’re not quite finished. We’re expecting to receive an additional post or two tomorrow, and to hear a response from Commissioner Josh Wright. We hope you’ll join us tomorrow for final posts and Commissioner Wright’s response.
Here are links to the posts so far:
- David Balto, Law Offices of David Balto: Some Quick Observations on the Drive for UMC Policy Guidelines and Economic Evidence and Section 5
- Terry Calvani & Angela Diveley, Freshfields: Injury to Competition and Efficiencies in Section 5 Claims
- James Cooper, GMU Law & Economics Center: The Limits of Section 5’s Scope Beyond the Sherman Act and A Sensible Limit to the FTC’s Section 5 Authority
- Dan Crane, Michigan Law: Section 5 and Principles of Self-Restraint
- Gus Hurwitz, Nebraska Law: The Application of Chevron to Section 5 and A Policy Statement Is Not Enough
- Thom Lambert, Missouri Law: Guidelines for the FTC’s UMC Authority: What’s Clear and What’s Not?
- Marina Lao, Seton Hall Law: The FTC’s Unfair Methods of Competition Authority
- Geoffrey Manne, Lewis & Clark Law/ICLE: The Importance of Sensible Guidance for UMC Enforcement
- Joe Sims, Jones Day: First Principles of Section 5 Authority
- Tim Wu, Columbia Law: Section 5 Guidelines Would Make the FTC Stronger and Better