Showing results for: “price gouging”
My Con Law Prof Flubs the Constitution…Again.
Once again, my constitutional law professor has embarrassed me with his gross misunderstanding of the U.S. Constitution. First, he insisted that it would be “unprecedented” for the U.S. Supreme Court to overturn a statute enacted by a “democratically elected Congress.” Seventh-grade Civics students know that’s not right, but Mr. Obama’s misstatement did have its intended ... My Con Law Prof Flubs the Constitution…Again.
What Would the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Say About Healthcare.gov?
In yesterday’s hearings on the disastrous launch of the federal health insurance exchanges, contractors insisted that part of the problem was a last-minute specification from the government: the feds didn’t want people to be able to “window shop” for health insurance until they had created a profile and entered all sorts of personal information. That’s ... What Would the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau Say About Healthcare.gov?
Google: Great Deal or Greatest Deal?
Critics of Google have argued that users overvalue Google’s services in relation to the data they give away. One breath-taking headline asked Who Would Pay $5,000 to Use Google?, suggesting that Google and its advertisers can make as much as $5,000 off of individuals whose data they track. Scholars, such as Nathan Newman, have used this ... Google: Great Deal or Greatest Deal?
Manufacturing (Broadband) Dissent
I have a new post up at TechPolicyDaily.com, excerpted below, in which I discuss the growing body of (surprising uncontroversial) work showing that broadband in the US compares favorably to that in the rest of the world. My conclusion, which is frankly more cynical than I like, is that concern about the US “falling behind” ... Manufacturing (Broadband) Dissent
My New Paper on Defining Exclusionary Conduct
In our recent blog symposium on Section 5 of the FTC Act, Latham & Watkins partner Tad Lipsky exposed one of antitrust’s dark little secrets: Nobody really knows what Sherman Act Section 2 forbids. The provision bans monopolization, attempted monopolization, and conspiracies to monopolize, and courts have articulated formal elements for each claim. But the ... My New Paper on Defining Exclusionary Conduct
On Debating Imaginary Felds
Harold Feld, in response to a recent Washington Post interview with AEI’s Jeff Eisenach about AEI’s new Center for Internet, Communications, and Technology Policy, accused “neo-conservative economists (or, as [Feld] might generalize, the ‘Right’)” of having “stopped listening to people who disagree with them. As a result, they keep saying the same thing over and over again.” (Full disclosure: ... On Debating Imaginary Felds
How the FCC Will Lose on Net Neutrality
Today’s oral argument in the D.C Circuit over the FCC’s Net Neutrality rules suggests that the case — Verizon v. FCC — is likely to turn on whether the Order impermissibly imposes common carrier regulation on broadband ISPs. If so, the FCC will lose, no matter what the court thinks of the Commission’s sharply contested ... How the FCC Will Lose on Net Neutrality
Ronald Coase on regulation
As Gus said, there will be much more to say, and much more said by others, on Coase’s passing. For now, I offer this excerpt from a 1997 Reason interview he gave with Tom Hazlett: Hazlett: You said you’re not a libertarian. What do you consider your politics to be? Coase: I really don’t know. I don’t reject ... Ronald Coase on regulation
Of Common Law and Common Sense: Children’s Consumer Product Safety Commission vies for National Nanny Title
With thanks to Geoff and everyone else, it’s great to join the cast here at TOTM. Geoff gave a nice introduction, so I won’t use this first post to further that purpose – especially when I have substance to discuss. The only prefatory words I’ll offer are that my work lies at the intersection of ... Of Common Law and Common Sense: <del>Children’s</del> Consumer Product Safety Commission vies for National Nanny Title
Anti-Patent Bias in Applying Injunction Test Results in Another District Court’s Reversal – Aria Diagnostics v. Sequenom (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2013)
[Cross Posted to the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property] In its recent decision in Douglas Dynamics v. Buyers Products Co. (Fed. Cir., May 21, 2013), the Federal Circuit was forced to reverse a district court’s abuse of its discretion because the trial judge injected an anti-patent bias into the legal test for determining ... Anti-Patent Bias in Applying Injunction Test Results in Another District Court’s Reversal – Aria Diagnostics v. Sequenom (Fed. Cir. Aug. 9, 2013)
Richard Epstein Critiques Obama Administration Veto of ITC Exclusion Order in Samsung v. Apple Dispute
Over at the blog for the Center for the Protection of Intellectual Property, Richard Epstein has posted a lengthy essay that critiques the Obama Administration’s decision this past August 3 to veto the exclusion order issued by the International Trade Commission (ITC) in the Samsung v. Apple dispute filed there (ITC Investigation No. 794). In ... Richard Epstein Critiques Obama Administration Veto of ITC Exclusion Order in Samsung v. Apple Dispute
Tad Lipsky on Lessons From the Section 2 Context
The FTC’s struggle to provide guidance for its enforcement of Section 5’s Unfair Methods of Competition (UMC) clause (or not – some oppose the provision of forward guidance by the agency, much as one occasionally heard opposition to the concept of merger guidelines in 1968 and again in 1982) could evoke a much broader long-run ... Tad Lipsky on Lessons From the Section 2 Context
