Showing archive for: “Harm to Competition”
Thoughts on Safe Harbors for Quantity Discounts (and Bundling)
Dennis Carlton and Michael Waldman have posted an insightful DOJ working paper on antitrust safe harbors for unilateral conduct involving quantity discounts and bundling. The discussion is very timely in light of the Microsoft CFI decision, AMC Report, Section 2 Hearings, and various monopolization cases in the United States, EU, and other antitrust jurisdictions. The Carlton & Waldman ... Thoughts on Safe Harbors for Quantity Discounts (and Bundling)
Dr. Miles (1911-2007)
So Dr. Miles is dead. May he rest in peace. No great surprises in the majority opinion in Leegin. Justice Kennedy, quite rightly, emphasized points we have asserted numerous times on this blog. Most notably: The per se rule should be reserved for practices that are always, or almost always, anticompetitive. The common law nature ... Dr. Miles (1911-2007)
A Response to Commissioner Harbour’s "Open Letter" on Leegin
Federal Trade Commissioner Pamela Jones Harbour has sent the U.S. Supreme Court justices an “open letter” regarding the pending Leegin case. [HT: Danny Sokol.] Leegin, as regular TOTM readers know, will test the continued vitality of Dr. Miles, the 1911 decision making it per se illegal for manufacturers and retailers to agree on minimum retail ... A Response to Commissioner Harbour’s "Open Letter" on Leegin
Bye Bye, Dr. Miles.
So it looks like Dr. Miles is going down. That’s a good thing. For non-antitrusters, Dr. Miles is a 1911 Supreme Court decision holding that “minimum vertical resale price maintenance” is per se illegal — that is, automatically illegal without inquiry into the practice’s actual effect on competition. Minimum vertical resale price maintenance (or “RPM”) ... Bye Bye, Dr. Miles.
Paternalism and the iPod, Part Trois
The WSJ Law Blog reports (via this AP Report) that the French law allowing regulators to force Apple to make its iPod compatible with rival offerings went into effect Thursday. “Me too” regulatory movements are already underway in Britain, Norway, Sweden, Poland and Denmark. This, as Microsoft plans to introduce “Zune,” its entry into the ... Paternalism and the iPod, Part Trois
Paternalism and the iPod, Part II: The Behavioral Economics of Apple?
Dave Hoffman over at Concurring Opinions asks: “Is Apple Exploiting Consumer Irrationality?” Dave is worried that consumers’ continuing iPod purchases may be irrational in the face of evidence that many iPod’s fail within their one year warranty period or shortly after, and that this strategy might explain Apple’s “growing market strength.” How likely are consumer ... Paternalism and the iPod, Part II: The Behavioral Economics of Apple?
Will SCOTUS Tame the Exotic Beast?
It is a pretty exciting time in the antitrust world. This, of course, is bad news for firms. SCOTUS will decide three antitrust cases this term, each offering a promising opportunity to clarify murky doctrine or undo an erroneous application of relatively clear antitrust principles. Texaco v Dagher falls into the latter category. The bulk ... Will SCOTUS Tame the Exotic Beast?
