Showing archive for: “Advertising”
Reserve Judgment: The FTC Takes on Amazon’s Ad Auctions
The price to beat in Amazon’s advertising auctions may not have come from another advertiser at all, according to a lawsuit filed Aug. 31 by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In the complaint, the FTC alleges that Amazon quietly set the price itself, promising one pricing rule and using another. That allegation could support a ... Reserve Judgment: The FTC Takes on Amazon’s Ad Auctions
Your Price May Vary: The FTC’s Personalized-Pricing Puzzle
A price that knows your name may be creepy. It may also be a bargain. That ambiguity sits at the heart of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) proposed enforcement policy statement on personalized pricing, which opens with a candid admission: The practice is “not well understood,” and its effects on consumers remain “unclear.” That uncertainty ... Your Price May Vary: The FTC’s Personalized-Pricing Puzzle
Fine Print for Every Price: The FTC’s One-Size-Fits-All Guidance
My first post at Truth on the Market—where I called myself a “Refugee from the FTC”—briefly discussed an advance notice of proposed rulemaking (ANPR) published in the Federal Register by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) under Chair Lina Khan. This one bore the expansive title “Trade Regulation Rule on Commercial Surveillance and Data Security.” I ... Fine Print for Every Price: The FTC’s One-Size-Fits-All Guidance
Google, the Unruh Act, and the Legal Risk of Knowing Your Audience
Advertising’s oldest rule is simple: Know your audience. In California, following it may get an online platform sued. Show retirement-home ads to seniors and student discounts to college students, and sensible targeting can suddenly look like unlawful discrimination. That question is now before California’s Sixth Appellate District. The dispute arises from a trial court ruling in ... Google, the Unruh Act, and the Legal Risk of Knowing Your Audience
Fit for Purpose, Unfit for Review: Why the DMA’s First Evaluation Could Never Find Failure
The first review of the Digital Markets Act (DMA) reads less like an evaluation than a wellness check performed by the patient’s proud parent. The pulse is strong. The color is good. Any lingering symptoms? Too early to tell. On April 28, 2026, the European Commission published the review required under Article 53 and declared ... Fit for Purpose, Unfit for Review: Why the DMA’s First Evaluation Could Never Find Failure
Antitrust Standing Room Only
Antitrust law does not hand out damages just because someone got hurt in the general vicinity of an antitrust violation. A plaintiff must show more than bad conduct, more than lost money, and more than a plausible violation of the Sherman Act. The loss must come from the thing antitrust law exists to protect: competition. ... Antitrust Standing Room Only
The Blind Spot Is the Point: Meta’s Incognito Chat and the Future of Private AI
Meta’s Incognito Chat is interesting not because it promises privacy, but because it makes privacy expensive. It limits what Meta can know, what Meta can monetize, and what Meta can hand over later. That is what makes the announcement worth taking seriously. Meta has launched Incognito Chat with Meta AI, a way to talk to ... The Blind Spot Is the Point: Meta’s Incognito Chat and the Future of Private AI
When a Blue Checkmark Becomes a €120 Million Problem
The European Commission’s first major enforcement action under the Digital Services Act (DSA) offers an early glimpse of how the European Union intends to regulate large digital platforms—and how far that approach may diverge from the U.S. model. The DSA is an EU regulation governing how online intermediary services operate, including social-media platforms, online marketplaces, ... When a Blue Checkmark Becomes a €120 Million Problem
The Platform in Your Living Room
Over the last few decades, antitrust scholars and practitioners have scrutinized the role of platforms—particularly intermediaries—in the internet economy. Many intermediary platforms also compete in the markets they facilitate. That dual role raises familiar concerns about self-preferencing and the risk that a firm may advantage its own products or services. Regulators have focused primarily on ... The Platform in Your Living Room
The Google Remedies Decision and Big Tech Antitrust
U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta’s Sept. 2 remedies opinion in the U.S. v. Google monopolization (Google Search) case is, in large part, a rejection of government regulation of digital platforms in the guise of antitrust. The limited and cabined conduct-related remedies it imposes are far less significant than its rejection of the U.S. Justice Department’s (DOJ) proposed conduct ... The Google Remedies Decision and Big Tech Antitrust
The EU’s Google Adtech Decision: Structural Remedies by Stealth?
The European Commission’s €2.95 billion decision against Google arrives amid heightened EU-U.S. trade tensions, the Trump administration’s recent criticism of EU tech regulations, internal disagreements within the Commission, and heated commentary on both sides of the Atlantic. But beyond geopolitics, the decision also raises important legal and policy questions. In particular, the Commission’s apparent request ... The EU’s Google Adtech Decision: Structural Remedies by Stealth?
Google Antitrust Remedies Could Harm the US Economy and Consumers
Google and the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) will make their closing arguments tomorrow in the Google Search remedies trial. Judicial adoption of the DOJ’s recommendations to “break up” Google, stemming from this and another DOJ lawsuit, could seriously undermine American innovation and competitiveness and harm, not help, American consumers. Background The DOJ sued Google in ... Google Antitrust Remedies Could Harm the US Economy and Consumers
