Showing archive for: “Efficiencies”
Marina Lao on the FTC’s Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Authority
FTC Commissioner Josh Wright’s recent issuance of a proposed policy statement on Section 5 of the FTC Act has reignited the debate on the appropriate scope of the agency’s authority to prosecute “unfair methods of competition” as standalone Section 5 violations. While the Supreme Court has held, consistent with clear congressional intent, that the FTC’s ... Marina Lao on the FTC’s Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Authority
Terry Calvani and Angela Diveley on Injury to Competition and Efficiencies in Section 5 Claims
We welcome Commissioner Wright’s contribution in making the important point that the Commission’s unfair methods of competition (UMC) jurisdiction under Section 5 of the FTCA should be subject to limiting principles. We make two observations about the policy statement and a more general observation about the FTC in light of its upcoming 100th anniversary. The ... Terry Calvani and Angela Diveley on Injury to Competition and Efficiencies in Section 5 Claims
Thom Lambert on Guidelines for the FTC’s UMC Authority: What’s Clear and What’s Not?
In the last few weeks, two members of the FTC—Commissioners Josh Wright and Maureen Ohlhausen—have staked largely consistent positions on guidelines for implementation of the Commission’s “unfair methods of competition” (UMC) authority. Their statements make two points that are, in my opinion, no-brainers. Where the statements conflict, they raise an issue worthy of significant contemplation. ... Thom Lambert on Guidelines for the FTC’s UMC Authority: What’s Clear and What’s Not?
Dan Crane on Section 5 and Principles of Self-Restraint
I’m delighted that Josh and Maureen have launched a concerted effort to have the FTC articulate clear principles for Section 5 enforcement. My own views on the proper scope of Section 5 are articulated in my book The Institutional Structure of Antitrust Enforcement. I won’t attempt a comprehensive regurgitation here, but just offer three quick ... Dan Crane on Section 5 and Principles of Self-Restraint
Welcome to the TOTM Blog Symposium: Regulating the Regulators–Guidance for the FTC’s Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Authority
Regulating the Regulators: Guidance for the FTC’s Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Authority August 1, 2013 Truthonthemarket.com Welcome! We’re delighted to kick off our one-day blog symposium on the FTC’s unfair methods of competition (UMC) authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act. Last month, FTC Commissioner Josh Wright began a much-needed conversation on the ... Welcome to the TOTM Blog Symposium: Regulating the Regulators–Guidance for the FTC’s Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Authority
Bringing the Error Cost Framework to the Agency: Commissioner Wright’s Proposed Policy Statement on Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Enforcement
FTC Commissioner Wright issued today his Policy Statement on enforcement of Section 5 of the FTC Act against Unfair Methods of Competition (UMC)—the one he promised in April. Wright introduced the Statement in an important policy speech this morning before the Executive Committee Meeting of the New York State Bar Association’s Antitrust Section. Both the Statement ... Bringing the Error Cost Framework to the Agency: Commissioner Wright’s Proposed Policy Statement on Section 5 Unfair Methods of Competition Enforcement
Commissioner Wright lays down the gauntlet on Section 5
As Thom noted (here and here), Josh’s speech at the ABA Spring Meeting was fantastic. In laying out his agenda at the FTC, Josh highlighted two areas on which he intends to focus: Section 5 and public restraints on trade. These are important, even essential, areas, and Josh’s leadership here will be most welcome. I’m ... Commissioner Wright lays down the gauntlet on Section 5
Policy Debates On Patents Should Focus On Facts, Not Rhetoric (Forbes.com Op-Ed)
A heavily revised and expanded verison of one of my earlier blog postings was just posted as an op-ed on Forbes.com. This op-ed addresses how the FTC and DOJ have let themselves become swept up in anti-patent rhetoric, as evidenced by the FTC-DOJ workshop on December 10 that I participated in. Here’s a small taste ... Policy Debates On Patents Should Focus On Facts, Not Rhetoric (Forbes.com Op-Ed)
Debates on Patent System Should Focus on Facts, Not Rhetoric
The following is an op-ed I wrote last week on behalf of the Innovation Alliance, which represents innovators, patent owners and stakeholders from a diverse range of industries that believe in the critical importance of maintaining a strong patent system that supports innovative enterprises of all sizes. Unfortunately, the op-ed not find a home in a ... Debates on Patent System Should Focus on Facts, Not Rhetoric
Let The Music Play: Critics Of Universal-EMI Merger Are Singing Off-Key
There are a lot of inaccurate claims – and bad economics – swirling around the Universal Music Group (UMG)/EMI merger, currently under review by the US Federal Trade Commission and the European Commission (and approved by regulators in several other jurisdictions including, most recently, Australia). Regulators and industry watchers should be skeptical of analyses that ... Let The Music Play: Critics Of Universal-EMI Merger Are Singing Off-Key
The procompetitive story that could undermine the DOJ’s e-books antitrust case against Apple
Did Apple conspire with e-book publishers to raise e-book prices? That’s what DOJ argues in a lawsuit filed yesterday. But does that violate the antitrust laws? Not necessarily—and even if it does, perhaps it shouldn’t. Antitrust’s sole goal is maximizing consumer welfare. While that generally means antitrust regulators should focus on lower prices, the situation is more ... The procompetitive story that could undermine the DOJ’s e-books antitrust case against Apple
Greg Werden in Defense of Defining Markets
One of the more significant papers in antitrust of late has been Professor Kaplow’s Why (Ever) Define Markets? Kaplow provocatively argues that the entire “market definition/ market share” paradigm of antitrust is misguided and beyond repair. Kaplow describes the exclusive role of market definition in that paradigm as generating inferences about market power, argues that ... Greg Werden in Defense of Defining Markets
