Showing results for: “digital markets act”
The Major Questions Doctrine Slams the Door Shut on UMC Rulemaking
The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) current leadership appears likely to issue substantive rules concerning “unfair methods of competition” (UMC) at some point. FTC Chair Lina Khan, in an article with former FTC Commissioner Rohit Chopra, argued that the commission has the authority to issue UMC rules pursuant to the Federal Trade Commission Act based on ... The Major Questions Doctrine Slams the Door Shut on UMC Rulemaking
NetChoice, the Supreme Court, and the State Action Doctrine
George Orwell’s “Nineteen Eighty-Four” is frequently invoked when political actors use language to obfuscate what they are doing. Ambiguity in language can allow both sides to appeal to the same words, like “the First Amendment” or “freedom of speech.” In a sense, the arguments over online speech currently before the U.S. Supreme Court really amount ... NetChoice, the Supreme Court, and the State Action Doctrine
On the Origin of Platforms: An Evolutionary Perspective
Hardly a day goes by without news of further competition-related intervention in the digital economy. The past couple of weeks alone have seen the European Commission announce various investigations into Apple’s App Store (here and here), as well as reaffirming its desire to regulate so-called “gatekeeper” platforms. Not to mention the CMA issuing its final ... On the Origin of Platforms: An Evolutionary Perspective
Doublespeak in the Debate About Rural Broadband Buildout
As Thomas Sowell has noted many times, political debates often involve the use of words which if taken literally mean something very different than the connotations which are conveyed. Examples abound in the debate about broadband buildout. There is a general consensus on the need to subsidize aspects of broadband buildout to rural areas in ... Doublespeak in the Debate About Rural Broadband Buildout
The Capitalist’s Lived Experience
Speaking about his new book in a ProMarket interview, David Dayen inadvertently captures what is perhaps the essential disconnect between antitrust reformers (populists, neo-Brandeisians, hipsters, whatever you may call them) and those of us who are more comfortable with the antitrust status quo (whatever you may call us). He says: “The antitrust doctrine that we’ve ... The Capitalist’s Lived Experience
Why I think the Apple e-books antitrust decision will (or at least should) be overturned
On July 10 a federal judge ruled that Apple violated antitrust law by conspiring to raise prices of e-books when it negotiated deals with five major publishers. I’ve written on the case and the issues involved in it several times, including here, here, here and here. The most recent of these was titled, “Why I ... Why I think the Apple e-books antitrust decision will (or at least should) be overturned
Assessing Less Restrictive Alternatives and Interbrand Competition in Epic v Apple
The International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) filed an amicus brief on behalf of itself and 26 distinguished law & economics scholars with the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals in the hotly anticipated and intensely important Epic Games v Apple case. A fantastic group of attorneys from White & Case generously assisted us ... Assessing Less Restrictive Alternatives and Interbrand Competition in Epic v Apple
Correcting the Federalist Society Review’s Mischaracterization of How to Regulate
Ours is not an age of nuance. It’s an age of tribalism, of teams—“Yer either fer us or agin’ us!” Perhaps I should have been less surprised, then, when I read the unfavorable review of my book How to Regulate in, of all places, the Federalist Society Review. I had expected some positive feedback from ... Correcting the Federalist Society Review’s Mischaracterization of How to Regulate
The Case Against the Section 5 Case Against Intel (Cross-Posted)
Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog is hosting a symposium on The Role of FTC Act Section 5 in Light of Intel. Today’s contributions include Dan Crane (Michigan), Keith Hylton (BU), Bob Lande (Baltimore) and me. Up tomorrow will be TOTM’s Geoff Manne, Sean Heather (US Chamber), and Herbert Hovenkamp (Iowa). My contribution is available here, ... The Case Against the Section 5 Case Against Intel (Cross-Posted)
Antitrust at the Agencies: The Meat of the Matter Edition
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) issued comments Sept. 11 in support of a proposed U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) rule that “seeks to clarify the scope of what constitutes unfair practices under the Packers and Stockyards Act (PSA), which assures fair competition and fair trade practices to protect farmers, ranchers, growers, and consumers.” In the ... Antitrust at the Agencies: The Meat of the Matter Edition
Klein v. Coase III: Fisher Body-General Motors Again (and Again)
Peter Klein‘s post over at the always excellent Organizations and Markets reminded me that I have been wanting to blog about the most recent exchange between Ben Klein and Ronald Coase over the asset specificity, vertical integration, and the famous Fisher Body – General Motors example which has become a classic example of hold up ... Klein v. Coase III: Fisher Body-General Motors Again (and Again)
For LabMD, the Devil Is in the Not-So-Well Specified Details
The Eleventh Circuit’s LabMD opinion came out last week and has been something of a rorschach test for those of us who study consumer protection law. Neil Chilson found the result to be a disturbing sign of slippage in Congress’s command that the FTC refrain from basing enforcement on “public policy.” Berin Szóka, on the ... For LabMD, the Devil Is in the Not-So-Well Specified Details
