Showing results for: “digital markets act”
Section 2 Symposium: Thom Lambert on Defining and Identifying Exclusionary Conduct
There’s a fundamental problem with Section 2 of the Sherman Act: nobody really knows what it means. More specifically, we don’t have a very precise definition for “exclusionary conduct,” the second element of a Section 2 claim. The classic definition from the Supreme Court’s Grinnell decision — “the willful acquisition or maintenance of [monopoly] power ... Section 2 Symposium: Thom Lambert on Defining and Identifying Exclusionary Conduct
Section 2 Symposium
We’re very pleased to be able to kick off Truth on the Market’s symposium on Section 2 and the Section 2 Report. We’ve put together a lineup that includes current and former agency representatives, economists, practicing lawyers, and academics in the hopes of creating an environment conductive to a productive discussion of not only the ... Section 2 Symposium
Section 2 Symposium: Howard Marvel–An Economist’s View
In the wake of Bork and Posner, and Baxter and the Reagan Revolution, a consensus emerged that big could be bad, but the harm that dominant firms could do needed to be demonstrated, not simply assumed in consequence of their sheer size. Moreover, the demonstration required harm to competition. The consensus held through the Clinton ... Section 2 Symposium: Howard Marvel–An Economist’s View
Section 2 Symposium: Keith Hylton–An Economist’s View
The “error cost” or “decision theory” approach to Section 2 legal standards emphasizes the probabilities and costs of errors in monopolization decisions. Two types of error, and two associated types of cost are examined. One type of error is that of a false acquittal, or false negative. The other type of error is that of ... Section 2 Symposium: Keith Hylton–An Economist’s View
Section 2 Symposium: David Evans–An Economist’s View
The treatment of unilateral conduct remains an intellectual and policy mess as we finish out the first decade of the 21st century. There were signs of hope a few years ago. The European Commission embarked on an effort to adopt an effects-based approach to unilateral conduct and to move away from the analytically-empty, object-based approach ... Section 2 Symposium: David Evans–An Economist’s View
Section 2 Symposium: Alden Abbott on the View from Within the FTC
Much ink has been spilled concerning the policy split revealed by the Justice Department’s September 2008 Report on Single Firm Conduct (“SFC”) and the Federal Trade Commission’s swift and rather critical rejoinder (issued by three of the four FTC Commissioners). (By “SFC” I refer to actions taken by a “dominant” firm or by an actual ... Section 2 Symposium: Alden Abbott on the View from Within the FTC
Section 2 Symposium: Dan Crane on Framing the Debate
I must confess that my basic reaction to the Section 2 report was disappointment. It’s not that I find much fault with the report itself–a few quibbles yes, but generally I find it quite satisfactory–but that after all of the time and effort put into the joint hearings by the FTC, the FTC wasn’t able ... Section 2 Symposium: Dan Crane on Framing the Debate
Section 2 Symposium: Michael Salinger on Framing the Debate
Given the embarrassing outcome of the FTC/DOJ single-firm conduct hearings, it is worth revisiting what the organizers of the hearings were attempting to accomplish. The Federal Register notice announcing the hearings provides some key insights. It read, in part: The Agencies expect to focus on legal doctrines and jurisprudence, economic research, and business and consumer ... Section 2 Symposium: Michael Salinger on Framing the Debate
Section 2 Symposium: Tad Lipsky on Framing the Debate
When the Justice Department issued its Unilateral Conduct Report last September, it became an instant sensation not primarily because of its content, but because of a strident public critique issued by three FTC Commissioners, including now-Chairman Leibowitz. The three (Harbour, Leibowitz and Rosch, hereinafter “HLR”) accused the Antitrust Division of placing “a thumb on the ... Section 2 Symposium: Tad Lipsky on Framing the Debate
Maryland Adopts New Per Se Rule for Minimum RPM
A new law in Maryland will take effect on October 1 and will re-instate the Dr. Miles rule for minimum RPM. The Wall Street Journal reports that it is a “move that could lead to lower prices for consumers across the country.” I doubt it. There are quite a few reasons to believe that shifts ... Maryland Adopts New Per Se Rule for Minimum RPM
Web Seminar: Antitrust Economics 101
I’ll be teaching an interactive web seminar on basic microeconomic concepts that form the basis of antitrust analysis through Competition Policy International’s Learning Center on three consecutive Wednesdays: May 13, 20, and 27th. CLE credit is available for practicing lawyers. Though I think the material will be useful for antitrust lawyers, law students interested in ... Web Seminar: Antitrust Economics 101
What does Tyler know about law and economics, anyway?
Over at Crooked Timber, Tyler Cowen comments on Steve Teles’ book on conservative legal movements. I never get tired of plugging Steve’s book (as he knows), so I’ll do it again here: It’s a great book, a riveting read, and instructive, to boot. Buy a copy today! Tyler comments (among a series of comments in ... What does Tyler know about law and economics, anyway?
