Showing archive for: “Error Costs”
Section 5, Collateral Consequences, and Counting Unicorns
Judge Frank Easterbrook once opined that observing predatory pricing was a bit like seeing a unicorn — in the sense that it was a phenomena around which there was much lore but not much empirical evidence. The debate over the current expansion of Section 5 liability increasingly has become about the search for a different ... Section 5, Collateral Consequences, and Counting Unicorns
Assessing the claims that the Google-AdMob merger will "leverage Google's dominance" and also kill kittens
News items continue to pile up suggesting that the FTC is likely to challenge Google’s acquisition of mobile application and website advertising provider, AdMob. See this recent article from the Wall Street Journal. News reports today contain this quote from an anonymous source: “The staff (at the U.S. Federal Trade Commission) believes there is a ... Assessing the claims that the Google-AdMob merger will "leverage Google's dominance" and also kill kittens
The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against Google
We have just uploaded to SSRN a draft of our article assessing the economics and the law of the antitrust case directed at the core of Google’s business: Its search and search advertising platform. The article is Google and the Limits of Antitrust: The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against Google. This is really the ... The Case Against the Antitrust Case Against Google
Debunking the "pro-business" rationale for Section 5 enforcement
Repeating claims he made in his statement in Intel, Chairman Leibowitz in a recent interview in the Wall Street Journal has this to say about stepped-up Section 5 enforcement at the FTC: The courts have pared back plaintiffs’ rights in antitrust cases. They’re concerned about what they believe to be the toxic combination of class ... Debunking the "pro-business" rationale for Section 5 enforcement
The case against the section 5 case against Intel, redux (cross-posted)
As Josh noted in cross-posting his comment on Section 5 and Intel, Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog is hosting a symposium on the role of FTC Act Section 5 in light of Intel. Josh’s contribution at AC&P is available here, along with the other symposium participants. I, too, have contributed a post, likewise cross-posted here. ... The case against the section 5 case against Intel, redux (cross-posted)
The Case Against the Section 5 Case Against Intel (Cross-Posted)
Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog is hosting a symposium on The Role of FTC Act Section 5 in Light of Intel. Today’s contributions include Dan Crane (Michigan), Keith Hylton (BU), Bob Lande (Baltimore) and me. Up tomorrow will be TOTM’s Geoff Manne, Sean Heather (US Chamber), and Herbert Hovenkamp (Iowa). My contribution is available here, ... The Case Against the Section 5 Case Against Intel (Cross-Posted)
Armentano in the WSJ, Abolition and Antitrust Fairy Tales …
Leading antitrust critic and abolitionist, Dominick Armentano, has a letter to the editor in the WSJ. The point of the letter to the editor is rather specific: that FTC’s attack on Intel is no outlier in the historical context of antitrust enforcement, contrary to the WSJ’s description. To the contrary, Armentano argues that Intel is ... Armentano in the WSJ, Abolition and Antitrust Fairy Tales …
Features v. Bugs: Intel and the Relationship Between Sections 2 and 5
There will be much to say about the Federal Trade Commission’s Intel complaint in the coming months. And we’ve said quite a bit already. But having just read the complaint and the statements from Chairman Leibowitz and Commissioner Rosch discussing the various rationales for making Section 5 the primary hook for this case, I wanted ... Features v. Bugs: Intel and the Relationship Between Sections 2 and 5
The seeds of an antitrust disaster
If you live outside the farm belt (or you’re not an antitrust junkie) you might have missed what is shaping up to be one of the biggest antitrust stories of the coming year: The set of antitrust accusations and actions against Monsanto for its alleged anticompetitive conduct in the biotech seed market. The AP reports: ... The seeds of an antitrust disaster
A Decision-Theoretic Rule of Reason for Minimum Resale Price Maintenance
My latest working paper, which bears the same title as this post, is now available on SSRN. In the paper, I address the challenge created by the Supreme Court’s 2007 Leegin decision, which abrogated the 96 year-old rule declaring resale price maintenance (RPM) to be per se illegal. The Leegin Court held that instances of ... A Decision-Theoretic Rule of Reason for Minimum Resale Price Maintenance
PeaceHealth and De Facto Exclusive Dealing, Part III
Josh’s thoughtful response (Bitchslap? Nah.) to my post criticizing the Ninth Circuit’s recent Masimo decision raises a number of important matters. I started to just submit a comment to Josh’s post, but then I figured a reply was post-worthy. (I don’t want the antitrust nerds who read these technical posts — and here’s to you, ... PeaceHealth and De Facto Exclusive Dealing, Part III
Should PeaceHealth Apply to De Facto Exclusive Dealing Claims?
Thom answers this question in the affirmative in his excellent post about the Ninth Circuit’s analysis in Masimo and is disappointed that the Ninth Circuit rejected the discount attribution standard as the sole test for Section 2 in favor of a separate inquiry as to whether the bundled discount arrangement resulted in a substantial foreclosure ... Should PeaceHealth Apply to De Facto Exclusive Dealing Claims?
