Showing results for: “digital markets act”
New Heritage Study Highlights Anticompetitive Features of Obamacare and Points the Way to Needed Reforms
A study released today by the Heritage Foundation (authored by Christopher M. Pope) succinctly describes the inherently anticompetitive nature of Obamacare, which will tend to inflate prices, not reduce costs: “The growth of monopoly power among health care providers bears much responsibility for driving up the cost of health care over recent years. By mandating ... New Heritage Study Highlights Anticompetitive Features of Obamacare and Points the Way to Needed Reforms
Joshua Wright, Martin Gaynor and Past FTC Officials to Speak at ICLE Event on Apple and Amazon Cases
The Federal Trade Commission’s recent enforcement actions against Amazon and Apple raise important questions about the FTC’s consumer protection practices, especially its use of economics. How does the Commission weigh the costs and benefits of its enforcement decisions? How does the agency employ economic analysis in digital consumer protection cases generally? Join the International Center ... Joshua Wright, Martin Gaynor and Past FTC Officials to Speak at ICLE Event on Apple and Amazon Cases
CONDITIONAL PRICING PRACTICES AND THE LIMITS OF ANTITRUST
The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) June 23 Workshop on Conditional Pricing Practices featured a broad airing of views on loyalty discounts and bundled pricing, popular vertical business practices that recently have caused much ink to be spilled by the antitrust commentariat. In addition to predictable academic analyses featuring alternative theoretical anticompetitive effects stories, the Workshop ... CONDITIONAL PRICING PRACTICES AND THE LIMITS OF ANTITRUST
Occupational Licensing, Competition, and the Constitution: Prospects for Reform?
U.S. antitrust law focuses primarily on private anticompetitive restraints, leaving the most serious impediments to a vibrant competitive process – government-initiated restraints – relatively free to flourish. Thus the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) should be commended for its July 16 congressional testimony that spotlights a fast-growing and particularly pernicious species of (largely state) government restriction ... Occupational Licensing, Competition, and the Constitution: Prospects for Reform?
ICLE and TechFreedom File Joint Comments in Defense of a Free Internet
The International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) and TechFreedom filed two joint comments with the FCC today, explaining why the FCC has no sound legal basis for micromanaging the Internet and why “net neutrality” regulation would actually prove counter-productive for consumers. The Policy Comments are available here, and the Legal Comments are here. See our previous ... ICLE and TechFreedom File Joint Comments in Defense of a Free Internet
Net Neutrality Regulation is Bad for Consumers and Probably Illegal
TechFreedom and the International Center for Law & Economics will shortly file two joint comments with the FCC, explaining why the FCC has no sound legal basis for micromanaging the Internet—now called “net neutrality regulation”—and why such regulation would be counter-productive as a policy matter. The following summarizes some of the key points from both ... Net Neutrality Regulation is Bad for Consumers and Probably Illegal
Crony Capitalism Revisited
There were several letters in today’s Wall Street Journal commenting on my recent op-ed with my son Joe on second best arguments for various forms of crony capitalism. Overall, these articles are critical of our position, but I do not disagree with them. Our original article was at best a weak defense, with terms like ... Crony Capitalism Revisited
From Today’s New York Times: Uber and Amazon
The Times seems to specialize in stories that use lots of economics but still miss the important points. Two examples from today: Stories about Uber, and about the dispute between Amazon and Hachette. UBER: The article describes Uber’s using price changes to measure elasticity of demand, and more or less gets it right. But it ... From Today’s New York Times: Uber and Amazon
Antitrust Law and Economics Scholars Urge Reversal in McWane
Last Monday, a group of nineteen scholars of antitrust law and economics, including yours truly, urged the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit to reverse the Federal Trade Commission’s recent McWane ruling. McWane, the largest seller of domestically produced iron pipe fittings (DIPF), would sell its products only to distributors that “fully supported” ... Antitrust Law and Economics Scholars Urge Reversal in McWane
A Cost-Benefit Framework for Antitrust Enforcement Policy
Debates among modern antitrust experts focus primarily on the appropriate indicia of anticompetitive behavior, the particular methodologies that should be applied in assessing such conduct, and the best combination and calibration of antitrust sanctions (fines, jail terms, injunctive relief, cease and desist orders). Given a broad consensus that antitrust rules should promote consumer welfare (albeit ... A Cost-Benefit Framework for Antitrust Enforcement Policy
The FTC’s in-app purchasing complaint against Amazon reflects its flawed, per se approach to unfairness
Today the FTC filed its complaint in federal district court in Washington against Amazon, alleging that the company’s in-app purchasing system permits children to make in-app purchases without parental “informed consent” constituting an “unfair practice” under Section 5 of the FTC Act. As I noted in my previous post on the case, in bringing this ... The FTC’s in-app purchasing complaint against Amazon reflects its flawed, per se approach to unfairness
Cablevision v. Viacom and the Sad State of Tying Doctrine
Whereas the antitrust rules on a number of once-condemned business practices (e.g., vertical non-price restraints, resale price maintenance, price squeezes) have become more economically sensible in the last few decades, the law on tying remains an embarrassment. The sad state of the doctrine is evident in a federal district court’s recent denial of Viacom’s motion to dismiss a tying action ... Cablevision v. Viacom and the Sad State of Tying Doctrine
