Coda: Varney withdraws Section 2 Report
I guess it comes as little surprise that Christine Varney has withdrawn the Section 2 Report. The comments made in the statement withdrawing the Report indicate . . . well, that Varney isn’t convinced by reading this blog, among other things. Coming on the heels of our Section 2 Symposium, the news is jarring, although ... Coda: Varney withdraws Section 2 Report
Section 2 Symposium: Wrap Up
Geoffrey Manne is Director, Global Public Policy at LECG and a Lecturer in Law at Lewis & Clark Law School. He is a founder of Truth on the Market. Josh Wright is Assistant Professor at George Mason University School of Law and a former Scholar in Residence at the FTC. ... Section 2 Symposium: Wrap Up
Section 2 Symposium: David Evans on "Tying as Antitrust's Greatest Intellectual Embarrassment"
David Evans is Head, Global Competition Policy Practice, LECG; Executive Director, Jevons Institute for Competition Law and Economics, and Visiting Professor, University College London; and Lecturer, University of Chicago. I’d like to propose a contest for the greatest intellectual embarrassment of antitrust. Let me name the first contestant—tying, which some of you know has been ... Section 2 Symposium: David Evans on "Tying as Antitrust's Greatest Intellectual Embarrassment"
Section 2 Symposium: Alden Abbott on the International Perspective
Alden Abbott is Associate Director, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission. The views expressed below are solely attributable to the author. They do not necessarily represent the views of the Federal Trade Commission or of any individual Federal Trade Commissioner. As I indicated in my prior blog entry, U.S. competition policy vis-à-vis single firm conduct ... Section 2 Symposium: Alden Abbott on the International Perspective
Section 2 Symposium: Bill Page on Microsoft’s "Forward-Looking" Monopolization Remedy
William Page is a Marshall M. Criser Eminent Scholar in Electronic Communications and Administrative Law at the University of Florida, Levin College of Law. The DOJ’s Section 2 Report speaks in general terms about the costs and benefits of various remedies for monopolization. It prefers “prohibitory” remedies, but holds open the possibility of “additional relief,” ... Section 2 Symposium: Bill Page on Microsoft’s "Forward-Looking" Monopolization Remedy
Section 2 Symposium: Tim Brennan on the Relationship Between Regulation and Antitrust
Tim Brennan is a professor of public policy and economics at UMBC and a senior fellow with Resources for the Future (RFF). When I first started working in antitrust at the Justice Department over thirty years ago—there’s a hard reality to accept—the Antitrust Division was then embroiled in an effort to reform the regulation of ... Section 2 Symposium: Tim Brennan on the Relationship Between Regulation and Antitrust
Section 2 Symposium: Herbert Hovenkamp on Patents and Exclusionary Practices
Herbert Hovenkamp is Professor of Law at The University of Iowa College of Law. One interesting aspect of the DOJ Report on Section 2 is the scant, episodic treatment of IP issues. The Report rejects the presumption of market power for patent ties (p. 81); has a very brief discussion of refusal to license patented ... Section 2 Symposium: Herbert Hovenkamp on Patents and Exclusionary Practices
Section 2 Symposium: Bill Kolasky on Proving Market Power
The market power section of the Department’s Single Firm Conduct report is one of the strongest sections of the report. It provides an exceptionally clear discussion of the market power element under Section 2. It recognizes, in particular, that a violation of Section 2 requires more than mere market power, but rather a finding of ... Section 2 Symposium: Bill Kolasky on Proving Market Power
Section 2 Symposium: Josh Wright on An Evidence Based Approach to Exclusive Dealing and Loyalty Discounts
Josh Wright is a Professor of Law at George Mason Law School, a former FTC Scholar in Residence and a regular contributor to Truth on the Market. The primary anticompetitive concern with exclusive dealing contracts is that a monopolist might be able to utilize exclusivity to fortify its market position, raise rivals’ costs of distribution, ... Section 2 Symposium: Josh Wright on An Evidence Based Approach to Exclusive Dealing and Loyalty Discounts
Section 2 Symposium: Tim Brennan on Predation, Exclusion, and Complement Market Monopolization
Tim Brennan is a professor of public policy and economics at UMBC and a senior fellow with Resources for the Future (RFF). As evidenced by this on-line symposium, the handling of cases under the rubrics “monopolization,” “single firm conduct”, or “abuse of dominance” continues to be debated by the competition policy community. This debate, as ... Section 2 Symposium: Tim Brennan on Predation, Exclusion, and Complement Market Monopolization
Section 2 Symposium: Howard Marvel on Safe Harbors for Short Term Exclusive Dealing Contracts
Howard P. Marvel is Professor of Economics in the Department of Economics and Professor of Law in the Moritz College of Law, both at The Ohio State University. Exclusive dealing prevents the bait-and-switch behavior by dealers who convert customers drawn by one brand to the products of its rivals. Despite the red flag of “exclusive” ... Section 2 Symposium: Howard Marvel on Safe Harbors for Short Term Exclusive Dealing Contracts
Section 2 Symposium: Dan Crane on Buyer-Instigated Bundled Discounts
Daniel Crane is a Professor of Law at Cardozo Law School (soon to be at University of Michigan Law School). Bundled discounts have been one of the hottest monopolization topics of the last decade. Much of the trouble began with the Third Circuit’s en banc decision in LePage’s v. 3M, which reversed an earlier 2-1 ... Section 2 Symposium: Dan Crane on Buyer-Instigated Bundled Discounts
