Showing archive for: “Monopolization”
Wright is Right and Price-Cost Safe Harbors are Wrong: The Raising Rivals’ Cost Paradigm, Loyalty Discounts and Exclusive Dealing
Guest post by Steve Salop, responding to Dan’s post and Thom’s post on the appropriate liability rule for loyalty discounts. I want to clarify some of the key issues in Commissioner Wright’s analysis of Exclusive Dealing and Loyalty Discounts as part of the raising rivals’ costs (“RRC”) paradigm. I never thought that I would have to defend Wright against ... Wright is Right and Price-Cost Safe Harbors are Wrong: The Raising Rivals’ Cost Paradigm, Loyalty Discounts and Exclusive Dealing
Dan Crane on Commissioner Wright’s Rejection of a Price-Cost Test for Loyalty Discounts
Guest post by Michigan Law’s Dan Crane. (See also Thom’s post taking issue with FTC Commissioner Josh Wright’s recent remarks on the appropriate liability rule for loyalty discounts). A number of people on both sides of the ideological spectrum were surprised by FTC Commissioner Josh Wright’s recent speech advocating that the FTC reject the use of price-cost ... Dan Crane on Commissioner Wright’s Rejection of a Price-Cost Test for Loyalty Discounts
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.
Why I think the government will have a tough time winning the Apple e-books antitrust case
Trial begins today in the Southern District of New York in United States v. Apple (the Apple e-books case), which I discussed previously here. Along with co-author Will Rinehart, I also contributed an essay to a discussion of the case in Concurrences (alongside contributions from Jon Jacobson and Mark Powell, among others). Much of my ... Why I think the government will have a tough time winning the Apple e-books antitrust case
Hey Hey! Ho Ho! Partial De Facto Exclusive Dealing Claims Have Got to Go!
Today, a group of eighteen scholars, of which I am one, filed an amicus brief encouraging the Supreme Court to review a Court of Appeals decision involving loyalty rebates. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently upheld an antitrust judgment based on a defendant’s loyalty rebates even though the rebates resulted in above-cost prices for the defendant’s products ... Hey Hey! Ho Ho! Partial De Facto Exclusive Dealing Claims Have Got to Go!
Meese on Bork (and the AALS)
William & Mary’s Alan Meese has posted a terrific tribute to Robert Bork, who passed away this week. Most of the major obituaries, Alan observes, have largely ignored the key role Bork played in rationalizing antitrust, a body of law that veered sharply off course in the middle of the last century. Indeed, Bork began his 1978 ... Meese on Bork (and the AALS)
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
Ginsburg & Wright on Dynamic Analysis and the Limits of Antitrust Institutions
Judge Douglas Ginsburg (D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals; NYU Law) and I have posted “Dynamic Antitrust and the Limits of Antitrust Institutions” to SSRN. Our article is forthcoming in Volume 78 (2) of the Antitrust Law Journal. We offer a cautionary note – from an institutional perspective – concerning the ever-increasing and influential calls for greater ... Ginsburg & Wright on Dynamic Analysis and the Limits of Antitrust Institutions
Apple Responds to the DOJ e-Books Complaint
Apple has filed its response to the DOJ Complaint in the e-books case. Here is the first paragraph of the Answer: The Government’s Complaint against Apple is fundamentally flawed as a matter of fact and law. Apple has not “conspired” with anyone, was not aware of any alleged “conspiracy” by others, and never “fixed prices.” ... Apple Responds to the DOJ e-Books Complaint
AALS Section on Antitrust and Economic Regulation Call for Papers: Google and Antitrust
The AALS Section on Antitrust and Economic Regulation call for papers features a topic near and dear to my heart this year: Google and Antitrust. Here is the announcement: Call for Papers Announcement AALS Section on Antitrust and Economic Regulation Google and Antitrust 2013 AALS Annual Meeting January 4-7, 2013 New Orleans, Louisiana ... AALS Section on Antitrust and Economic Regulation Call for Papers: Google and Antitrust
More Misguided Derision from Critics of the Verizon-SpectrumCo Wireless Deal
The pending wireless spectrum deal between Verizon Wireless and a group of cable companies (the SpectrumCo deal, for short) continues to attract opprobrium from self-proclaimed consumer advocates and policy scolds. In the latest salvo, Public Knowledge’s Harold Feld (and other critics of the deal) aren’t happy that Verizon seems to be working to appease the regulators by selling off ... More Misguided Derision from Critics of the Verizon-SpectrumCo Wireless Deal
