Showing results for: “digital markets act”
How a Patent Office Agency Undermines Patent Rights and Cripples Innovation – and What Can Be Done About It
On August 14, the Federalist Society’s Regulatory Transparency Project released a report detailing the harm imposed on innovation and property rights by the Patent Trial and Appeals Board, a Patent and Trademark Office patent review agency created by the infelicitously-named “America Invents Act” of 2011. As the report’s abstract explains: Patents are property rights secured ... How a Patent Office Agency Undermines Patent Rights and Cripples Innovation – and What Can Be Done About It
Democratic Party “Better Deal” Antitrust Proposals Would be a “Worse Deal” for the American Economy and Consumers
On July 24, as part of their newly-announced “Better Deal” campaign, congressional Democrats released an antitrust proposal (“Better Deal Antitrust Proposal” or BDAP) entitled “Cracking Down on Corporate Monopolies and the Abuse of Economic and Political Power.” Unfortunately, this antitrust tract is really an “Old Deal” screed that rehashes long-discredited ideas about “bigness is badness” ... Democratic Party “Better Deal” Antitrust Proposals Would be a “Worse Deal” for the American Economy and Consumers
When Should the Government Provide Public Goods?
My new book, How to Regulate: A Guide for Policymakers, will be published in a few weeks. A while back, I promised a series of posts on the book’s key chapters. I posted an overview of the book and a description of the book’s chapter on externalities. I then got busy on another writing project ... When Should the Government Provide Public Goods?
Congressional Review Act Should Be Used to Strike Down Ill-Advised CFPB Arbitration Rule
On July 10, the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) announced a new rule to ban financial service providers, such as banks or credit card companies, from using mandatory arbitration clauses to deny consumers the opportunity to participate in a class action (“Arbitration Rule”). The Arbitration Rule’s summary explains: First, the final rule prohibits covered providers ... Congressional Review Act Should Be Used to Strike Down Ill-Advised CFPB Arbitration Rule
The Washington Post editorial board understands online competition better than the European Commission does
Last week the editorial board of the Washington Post penned an excellent editorial responding to the European Commission’s announcement of its decision in its Google Shopping investigation. Here’s the key language from the editorial: Whether the demise of any of [the complaining comparison shopping sites] is specifically traceable to Google, however, is not so clear. ... The Washington Post editorial board understands online competition better than the European Commission does
Why the Canadian Supreme Court’s Equustek decision is a good thing for freedom — even on the Internet
I recently published a piece in the Hill welcoming the Canadian Supreme Court’s decision in Google v. Equustek. In this post I expand (at length) upon my assessment of the case. In its decision, the Court upheld injunctive relief against Google, directing the company to avoid indexing websites offering the infringing goods in question, regardless ... Why the Canadian Supreme Court’s Equustek decision is a good thing for freedom — even on the Internet
Unsurprising evidence that hiking the minimum wage hurts low wage workers
On July 1, the minimum wage will spike in several cities and states across the country. Portland, Oregon’s minimum wage will rise by $1.50 to $11.25 an hour. Los Angeles will also hike its minimum wage by $1.50 to $12 an hour. Recent research shows that these hikes will make low wage workers poorer. A ... Unsurprising evidence that hiking the minimum wage hurts low wage workers
A few thoughts on the European Commission decision against Google
Regardless of the merits and soundness (or lack thereof) of this week’s European Commission Decision in the Google Shopping case — one cannot assess this until we have the text of the decision — two comments really struck me during the press conference. First, it was said that Google’s conduct had essentially reduced innovation. If ... A few thoughts on the European Commission decision against Google
The European Commission’s Regrettable June 27 Google Antitrust Decision – and Its Broader Implications
Today I published an article in The Daily Signal bemoaning the European Commission’s June 27 decision to fine Google $2.7 billion for engaging in procompetitive, consumer welfare-enhancing conduct. The article is reproduced below (internal hyperlinks omitted), in italics: On June 27, the European Commission—Europe’s antitrust enforcer—fined Google over $2.7 billion for a supposed violation of ... The European Commission’s Regrettable June 27 Google Antitrust Decision – and Its Broader Implications
Professor Wright’s Latest Sage Advice: Stay Away from Unfocused “Big is Bad” Rhetoric in Assessing the Proposed AT&T-Time Warner Merger
Last October 26, Heritage scholar James Gattuso and I published an essay in The Daily Signal, explaining that the proposed vertical merger (a merger between firms at different stages of the distribution chain) of AT&T and Time Warner (currently undergoing Justice Department antitrust review) may have the potential to bestow substantial benefits on consumers – ... Professor Wright’s Latest Sage Advice: Stay Away from Unfocused “Big is Bad” Rhetoric in Assessing the Proposed AT&T-Time Warner Merger
The Supreme Court Misses the Mark in Murr v. Wisconsin – It’s High Time to Reconcile Regulatory and Physical Takings Law
Background: The Murr v. Wisconsin Case On June 23, in a 5-3 decision by Justice Anthony Kennedy (Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg, Stephen Breyer, Sonia Sotomayor, and Elena Kagan joined; Justice Neil Gorsuch did not participate), the U.S. Supreme Court upheld the Wisconsin State Court of Appeals’ ruling that two waterfront lots should be treated as ... The Supreme Court Misses the Mark in Murr v. Wisconsin – It’s High Time to Reconcile Regulatory and Physical Takings Law
The Demise of Lanham Act Trademark Disparagement Limitations Promotes Sound Free Market Economic Principles
Background On June 19, in Matal v. Tam, the U.S. Supreme Court (Justice Gorsuch did not participate in the case) affirmed the Federal Circuit’s ruling that the Lanham Act’s “disparagement clause” is unconstitutional under the First Amendment’s free speech clause. The Patent and Trademark Office denied the Slants’ (an Asian rock group) federal trademark registration, ... The Demise of Lanham Act Trademark Disparagement Limitations Promotes Sound Free Market Economic Principles
