Showing archive for: “FTC Act”
The Case of the Missing Sale: The FTC’s Personalized-Pricing Blind Spot
Suppose a retailer charges $10 for a service. One customer values it at $11 and buys it. Another values it at $8 and walks away. The retailer sends the second customer a $3 coupon. She pays $7, gets something worth $8 to her, and the retailer makes a sale it otherwise would have missed. The ... The Case of the Missing Sale: The FTC’s Personalized-Pricing Blind Spot
Your Price May Vary: The FTC’s Personalized-Pricing Puzzle
A price that knows your name may be creepy. It may also be a bargain. That ambiguity sits at the heart of the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) proposed enforcement policy statement on personalized pricing, which opens with a candid admission: The practice is “not well understood,” and its effects on consumers remain “unclear.” That uncertainty ... Your Price May Vary: The FTC’s Personalized-Pricing Puzzle
A Fee Too Far: Merchants, Surcharges, and the War on Plastic
Earlier this summer, my family took a vacation to Ocean City, Maryland, where the boardwalk offered ice cream, souvenirs, and an unexpected lesson in payment economics. Every retailer we visited added a surcharge of at least 3% for credit-card payments, yet not one posted a sign. I discovered the charges only later, while checking my ... A Fee Too Far: Merchants, Surcharges, and the War on Plastic
The FTC’s AI Accuracy Statement Needs a Fact Check
A policy statement about accuracy should, at minimum, be precise. The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) Proposed Policy Statement Concerning the Suppression of Accuracy in Artificial Intelligence Systems (AI Policy Statement) struggles with that assignment. The International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) submitted comments in response to the FTC’s request for input, and this post ... The FTC’s AI Accuracy Statement Needs a Fact Check
Much Ado About Removal: The Supreme Court, the FTC, and the End of Independent-ish Agencies
For roughly 90 years, Humphrey’s Executor had been the constitutional law equivalent of a load-bearing antique: an awkward, if still functioning, architectural kludge, much admired in certain circles, but increasingly hard to rationalize. Earlier this week, finally, the U.S. Supreme Court replaced it. In Trump v. Slaughter, the Court overruled that 1935 opinion. The president ... Much Ado About Removal: The Supreme Court, the FTC, and the End of Independent-ish Agencies
Antitrust at the Agencies: National Nanny Hangover Edition
The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) rulemaking machinery is humming again. Is it being tuned for optimal performance—or revved for another trip into the ditch? Most of the current action has to do with consumer protection. That’s par for the course, really. Apart from issuing the ill-fated noncompete rule, since vacated—comments here if anyone wants a ... Antitrust at the Agencies: National Nanny Hangover Edition
Addicted to Vagueness: Lawmakers Can’t Regulate Social Media by Vibes
A lawsuit over infinite scroll sounds, at first blush, like a fight over product design. Make the app less sticky. Stop nudging teens to keep scrolling. Turn down the algorithmic dopamine machine. But the harder constitutional question is whether courts can do all that through broad, after-the-fact liability standards without telling platforms what the law ... Addicted to Vagueness: Lawmakers Can’t Regulate Social Media by Vibes
No-Fly Zone: Why AI Doesn’t Need Helicopter Regulation
When a new product or service appears, some public officials default to helicopter regulation. The instinct to “do something, anything” rarely pays off—just ask helicopter parents and their kids. An overbearing approach drains the finite resources of lawmakers, enforcement agencies, and innovators. The public bears the cost: officials fixate on a single issue instead of ... No-Fly Zone: Why AI Doesn’t Need Helicopter Regulation
Turning Down the Thinking: A Law & Economics Trilogue on AI Throttling
Three section leads at the International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) read the same viral GitHub post and reached three different conclusions. Call it a trilogue—three views, one problem, and a technology that refuses to sit still. The GitHub issue filed last week against Anthropic’s Claude Code product carried a blunt title: “Claude Code ... Turning Down the Thinking: A Law & Economics Trilogue on AI Throttling
Speech, Section 5, and Some Curious Scribbling: A First Amendment Story
The line between regulating conduct and regulating speech can be thin—and sometimes, suspiciously convenient. Last week, my International Center for Law & Economics (ICLE) colleagues Ben Sperry and Jeff Westling published a post here at Truth on the Market titled “The FCC’s Sleeping Power over the Press.” It’s not about antitrust, but it’s well worth ... Speech, Section 5, and Some Curious Scribbling: A First Amendment Story
Brightline Rules and Case-by-Case Courts: The DMA and Epic v Apple
Brightline rules promise clarity. The early enforcement record suggests something closer to friction. Part I of this two-part series examined how mobile app-store anti-steering policies—rules that restrict developers from directing users to alternative offers or payment portals outside the app store—affect competition, consumers, and innovation. It also compared those policies with the restrictions upheld in ... Brightline Rules and Case-by-Case Courts: The DMA and Epic v Apple
The Iliad, the Odyssey, and the Amazon
A Sept. 25 press release from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) declares a sort of victory: “FTC Secures Historic $2.5 Billion Settlement Against Amazon.” The settlement comes in the infamous “dark patterns” case, where—as the press release reminds us—the agency “alleged that Amazon used deceptive methods to sign up consumers for Prime subscriptions and made ... The Iliad, the Odyssey, and the Amazon
