Showing archive for: “Exclusionary Conduct”
FTC v Amgen: The Economics of Bundled Discounts, Part Two
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently announced that it would sue to block Amgen’s proposed $27.8 billion acquisition of Horizon Therapeutics. The challenge represents a landmark in the history of pharmaceutical-industry antitrust enforcement, as the industry has largely been given license to engage in permissive mergers and acquisitions of smaller companies without challenge. In Part One, ... FTC v Amgen: The Economics of Bundled Discounts, Part Two
FTC v Amgen: The Economics of Bundled Discounts, Part One
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) recently announced that it would seek to block Amgen’s proposed $27.8 billion acquisition of Horizon Therapeutics. The move was the culmination of several years’ worth of increased scrutiny from both Congress and the FTC into antitrust issues in the biopharmaceutical industry. While the FTC’s move didn’t elicit much public comment, ... FTC v Amgen: The Economics of Bundled Discounts, Part One
Twitter v. Taamneh: Intermediary Liability, The First Amendment, and Section 230
After the oral arguments in Twitter v. Taamneh, Geoffrey Manne, Kristian Stout, and I spilled a lot of ink thinking through the law & economics of intermediary liability and how to draw lines when it comes to social-media companies’ responsibility to prevent online harms stemming from illegal conduct on their platforms. With the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Twitter v. Taamneh, ... Twitter v. Taamneh: Intermediary Liability, The First Amendment, and Section 230
Untangling the 9th Circuit’s Ruling in Epic Games v Apple
The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled late last month on Epic Games’ appeal of the decision rendered in 2021 by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California in Epic Games v Apple, affirming in part and reversing in part the district court’s judgment. In the original case, Epic had challenged as a violation ... Untangling the 9th Circuit’s Ruling in Epic Games v Apple
What the European Commission’s More Interventionist Approach to Exclusionary Abuses Could Mean for EU Courts and for U.S. States
The European Commission on March 27 showered the public with a series of documents heralding a new, more interventionist approach to enforce Article 102 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (TFEU), which prohibits “abuses of dominance.” This new approach threatens more aggressive, less economically sound enforcement of single-firm conduct in Europe. ... What the European Commission’s More Interventionist Approach to Exclusionary Abuses Could Mean for EU Courts and for U.S. States
Biweekly FTC Roundup: Throwing Stones in Glass Containers Edition
In February’s FTC roundup, I noted an op-ed in the Wall Street Journal in which Commissioner Christine Wilson announced her intent to resign from the Federal Trade Commission. Her departure, and her stated reasons therefore, were not encouraging for those of us who would prefer to see the FTC function as a stable, economically grounded, ... Biweekly FTC Roundup: Throwing Stones in Glass Containers Edition
Reining in Digital Competition to No Good End: Will AICOA and OAMA Rise from the Grave?
The 117th Congress closed out without a floor vote on either of the major pieces of antitrust legislation introduced in both chambers: the American Innovation and Choice Online Act (AICOA) and the Open Apps Market Act (OAMA). But it was evident at yesterday’s hearing of the Senate Judiciary Committee’s antitrust subcommittee that at least some ... Reining in Digital Competition to No Good End: Will AICOA and OAMA Rise from the Grave?
Killer Acquisition or Leveling Up: The Use of Mergers to Enter Adjacent Markets
In the world of video games, the process by which players train themselves or their characters in order to overcome a difficult “boss battle” is called “leveling up.” I find that the phrase also serves as a useful metaphor in the context of corporate mergers. Here, “leveling up” can be thought of as acquiring another ... Killer Acquisition or Leveling Up: The Use of Mergers to Enter Adjacent Markets
Why I’m a Skeptic of a Noncompete Ban
Under a recently proposed rule, the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) would ban the use of noncompete terms in employment agreements nationwide. Noncompetes are contracts that workers sign saying they agree to not work for the employer’s competitors for a certain period. The FTC’s rule would be a major policy change, regulating future contracts and retroactively ... Why I’m a Skeptic of a Noncompete Ban
Biweekly FTC Roundup: Highly Skilled Sandwich Maker Edition
Happy New Year? Right, Happy New Year! The big news from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) is all about noncompetes. From what were once the realms of labor and contract law, noncompetes are terms in employment contracts that limit in various ways the ability of an employee to work at a competing firm after separation ... Biweekly FTC Roundup: Highly Skilled Sandwich Maker Edition
Patent Pools, Innovation, and Antitrust Policy
Late last month, 25 former judges and government officials, legal academics and economists who are experts in antitrust and intellectual property law submitted a letter to Assistant Attorney General Jonathan Kanter in support of the U.S. Justice Department’s (DOJ) July 2020 Avanci business-review letter (ABRL) dealing with patent pools. The pro-Avanci letter was offered in ... Patent Pools, Innovation, and Antitrust Policy
The FTC Knows It When It Sees It
When Congress created the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in 1914, it charged the agency with condemning “unfair methods of competition.” That’s not the language Congress used in writing America’s primary antitrust statute, the Sherman Act, which prohibits “monopoliz[ation]” and “restraint[s] of trade.” Ever since, the question has lingered whether the FTC has the authority to ... The FTC Knows It When It Sees It
