Showing archive for: “Common Law”
Why a Common Law Approach to Defining “Unfair Methods of Competition” Won’t Work
Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act proclaims that “[u]nfair methods of competition . . . are hereby declared unlawful.” The FTC has exclusive authority to enforce that provision and uses it to prosecute Sherman Act violations. The Commission also uses the provision to prosecute conduct that doesn’t violate the Sherman Act but is, ... Why a Common Law Approach to Defining “Unfair Methods of Competition” Won’t Work
A Cost-Benefit Prescription for FTC Online Data Security Regulation
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) continues to expand its presence in online data regulation. On August 13 the FTC announced a forthcoming workshop to explore appropriate policies toward “big data,” a term used to refer to advancing technologies that are dramatically expanding the commercial collection, analysis, use, and storage of data. This initiative follows ... A Cost-Benefit Prescription for FTC Online Data Security Regulation
Highlights from Josh Wright’s Interview in The Antitrust Source
Anyone interested in antitrust enforcement policy (and what TOTM reader isn’t?) should read FTC Commissioner Josh Wright’s interview in the latest issue of The Antitrust Source. The extensive (22 page!) interview covers a number of topics and demonstrates the positive influence Commissioner Wright is having on antitrust enforcement and competition policy in general. Commissioner Wright’s ... Highlights from Josh Wright’s Interview in The Antitrust Source
Of Common Law and Common Sense: Children’s Consumer Product Safety Commission vies for National Nanny Title
With thanks to Geoff and everyone else, it’s great to join the cast here at TOTM. Geoff gave a nice introduction, so I won’t use this first post to further that purpose – especially when I have substance to discuss. The only prefatory words I’ll offer are that my work lies at the intersection of ... Of Common Law and Common Sense: <del>Children’s</del> Consumer Product Safety Commission vies for National Nanny Title
Geoffrey Manne on the Importance of Sensible Guidance for UMC Enforcement
Josh and Maureen are to be commended for their important contributions to the discussion over the proper scope of the FTC’s Section 5 enforcement authority. I have commented extensively on UMC and Section 5, Josh’s statement, and particularly the problems if UMC enforcement against the use of injunctions to enforce FRAND-encumbered SEPs before (see, for ... Geoffrey Manne on the Importance of Sensible Guidance for UMC Enforcement
James Cooper on the Limits of Section 5’s Scope Beyond the Sherman Act
The FTC has long been on a quest to find the elusive species of conduct that Section 5 alone can tackle. A series of early Supreme Court cases interpreting the FTC Act – the most recent and widely cited of which is more than forty years old (FTC v. Sperry & Hutchinson Co., 405 U.S. ... James Cooper on the Limits of Section 5’s Scope Beyond the Sherman Act
The Final Order in the FTC’s Google standard-essential patents case and the continuing danger to standard-setting
On July 24, the Federal Trade Commission issued a modified complaint and consent order in the Google/Motorola case. The FTC responded to the 25 comments on the proposed Order by making several amendments, but the Final Order retains the original order’s essential restrictions on injunctions, as the FTC explains in a letter accompanying the changes. ... The Final Order in the FTC’s Google standard-essential patents case and the continuing danger to standard-setting
The “Common Law Property” Myth in the Libertarian Critique of IP Rights (Part 2)
In Part One, I addressed the argument by some libertarians that so-called “traditional property rights in land” are based in inductive, ground-up “common law court decisions,” but that intellectual property (IP) rights are top-down, artificial statutory entitlements. Thus, for instance, libertarian law professor, Tom Bell, has written in the University of Illinois Journal of Law, ... The “Common Law Property” Myth in the Libertarian Critique of IP Rights (Part 2)
The “Common Law Property” Myth in the Libertarian Critique of IP Rights (Part 1)
In libertarian critiques of intellectual property (IP) rights, such as copyrights and patents, it’s common to the hear the claim that “traditional property rights in land” is based in inductive, ground-up “common law court decisions,” but that IP rights are top-down, artificial statutory entitlements. Thus, the argument goes, property rights in land are rooted solely ... The “Common Law Property” Myth in the Libertarian Critique of IP Rights (Part 1)
Law Review Publishing Norms and Inefficient Performance
One of my colleagues recently accepted a publication offer on a law review article, only to receive a later publication offer from a much more prestigious journal. This sort of occurrence is not uncommon in the legal academy, where scholars submitting articles for publication do not offer to publish their work in a journal but rather solicit publication offers from journals (and generally solicit ... Law Review Publishing Norms and Inefficient Performance
Larry Ribstein on The Future of Legal Education
What will legal education be like in the significantly deregulated world I’ve predicted in prior posts? I gave some thought to this question in my recent paper, Practicing Theory. There I pointed out that law schools, and particularly law faculty, have benefited from the same regulation that has benefited lawyers. Although lawyers now complain that ... Larry Ribstein on The Future of Legal Education
Hans Bader on Abolish Law School Requirement, Keep the Bar Exam?
Lawyer licensing should not be completely abolished, but it should be made radically easier and cheaper by abolishing the requirement that lawyers attend law school to sit for the bar exam, and by only requiring passage of the bar exam for those who handle court cases. Legal redress should also be made easier by allowing ... Hans Bader on Abolish Law School Requirement, Keep the Bar Exam?
