Showing archive for: “Error Costs”
Should There Be a Safe Harbor for Above-Cost Loyalty Discounts? Why I Believe Wright’s Wrong.
It’s not often that I disagree with my friend and co-author, FTC Commissioner Josh Wright, on an antitrust matter. But when it comes to the proper legal treatment of loyalty discounts, the Commish and I just don’t see eye to eye. In a speech this past Monday evening, Commissioner Wright rejected the view that there should ... Should There Be a Safe Harbor for Above-Cost Loyalty Discounts? Why I Believe Wright’s Wrong.
Behavioral Merger Remedies and the Hippocratic Principle
Last Thursday, the FTC settled a challenge to a company’s acquisitions of two key rivals. The two acquisitions, each of which failed to meet the threshold for required reporting under Hart Scott Rodino, occurred in 2005 and 2008. Because the acquired companies have been fully integrated into the acquirer and all distinct operations have been ... Behavioral Merger Remedies and the Hippocratic Principle
Section 5 of the FTC Act and monopolization cases: A brief primer
In the past two weeks, Members of Congress from both parties have penned scathing letters to the FTC warning of the consequences (both to consumers and the agency itself) if the Commission sues Google not under traditional antitrust law, but instead by alleging unfair competition under Section 5 of the FTC Act. The FTC is rumored to be ... Section 5 of the FTC Act and monopolization cases: A brief primer
The market realities that undermine the antitrust case against Google
As the Google antitrust discussion heats up on its way toward some culmination at the FTC, I thought it would be helpful to address some of the major issues raised in the case by taking a look at what’s going on in the market(s) in which Google operates. To this end, I have penned a ... The market realities that undermine the antitrust case against Google
Contemplating Disclosure-Based Insider Trading Regulation
TOTM friend Stephen Bainbridge is editing a new book on insider trading. He kindly invited me to contribute a chapter, which I’ve now posted to SSRN (download here). In the chapter, I consider whether a disclosure-based approach might be the best way to regulate insider trading. As law and economics scholars have long recognized, informed stock trading may create both harms and benefits ... Contemplating Disclosure-Based Insider Trading Regulation
A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Insider Trading Regulation
Regular readers will know that several of us TOTM bloggers are fans of the “decision-theoretic” approach to antitrust law. Such an approach, which Josh and Geoff often call an “error cost” approach, recognizes that antitrust liability rules may misfire in two directions: they may wrongly acquit harmful practices, and they may wrongly convict beneficial (or ... A Decision-Theoretic Approach to Insider Trading Regulation
AAI’s Antitrust Jury Instruction Project: A good idea in theory, but…
The American Antitrust Institute has announced plans to draft a comprehensive set of jury instructions for antitrust trials. According to AAI president Bert Foer: In Sherman Act Section 1 and Section 2 civil cases, judges tend to gravitate towards the ABA Model Instructions as the gold standard for impartial instructions. … The AAI believes the ABA model ... AAI’s Antitrust Jury Instruction Project: A good idea in theory, but…
Ninth Circuit Moves Tying Doctrine in the Right Direction. Will SCOTUS Follow?
The Ninth Circuit recently issued a decision that pushes the doctrine governing tying in the right direction. If appealed, the decision could provide the Roberts Court with an opportunity to do for tying what its Leegin decision did for resale price maintenance: reduce error costs by bringing an overly prohibitory liability rule in line with economic learning. First, some ... Ninth Circuit Moves Tying Doctrine in the Right Direction. Will SCOTUS Follow?
Barnett v. Barnett on Antitrust
Tom Barnett (Covington & Burling) represents Expedia in, among other things, its efforts to persuade a US antitrust agency to bring a case against Google involving the alleged use of its search engine results to harm competition. In that role, in a recent piece in Bloomberg, Barnett wrote the following things: “The U.S. Justice Department ... Barnett v. Barnett on Antitrust
Sacrificing Consumer Welfare in the Search Bias Debate
Eric Clemons and Nehal Madhani have a posted a series of short blog posts on the Huffington Post focusing on Google, antitrust, and more specifically, vertical integration and search (Part I, Part II, and Part III). The articles contain much of the standard hand-wringing about vertical integration and its impact on consumer welfare. This is ... Sacrificing Consumer Welfare in the Search Bias Debate
Type I errors in action, Google edition
Does anyone really still believe that the threat of antitrust enforcement doesn’t lead to undesirable caution on the part of potential defendants? Whatever you may think of the merits of the Google/ITA merger (and obviously I suspect the merits cut in favor of the merger), there can be no doubt that restraining Google’s (and other ... Type I errors in action, Google edition
Against Consumer Choice as an Antitrust Standard (Some Preliminary Thoughts)
The “consumer choice” approach to antitrust is increasingly discussed in a variety of settings, and endorsed by regulators and in scholarship, especially but not exclusively in the Section 5 context. The fundamental idea is that the “conventional” efficiency approach embedded in the total and/or consumer welfare standards is too cramped and does not measure the ... Against Consumer Choice as an Antitrust Standard (Some Preliminary Thoughts)
