Showing archive for: “Monopolization”
Summary Judgment Granted in Mayer Laboratories v. Church & Dwight
Judge Edward Chen in the Northern District of California granted Church & Dwight’s motion for summary judgment as to Mayer Laboratories antitrust claims involving Church & Dwight’s shelf space agreements with retailers in the condom market. Church & Dwight is the manufacturer of Trojan brand condoms. Specifically, Mayer argued that Church & Dwight’s shelf space ... Summary Judgment Granted in Mayer Laboratories v. Church & Dwight
The procompetitive story that could undermine the DOJ’s e-books antitrust case against Apple
Did Apple conspire with e-book publishers to raise e-book prices? That’s what DOJ argues in a lawsuit filed yesterday. But does that violate the antitrust laws? Not necessarily—and even if it does, perhaps it shouldn’t. Antitrust’s sole goal is maximizing consumer welfare. While that generally means antitrust regulators should focus on lower prices, the situation is more ... The procompetitive story that could undermine the DOJ’s e-books antitrust case against Apple
DOJ’s Latest on Apple Investigation
From the WSJ: Publishers argue that the agency model promotes competition by allowing more booksellers to thrive. They say Amazon had sold e-books below cost and that agency pricing saved book publishers from the fate suffered by record companies. But the Justice Department believes it has a strong case that Apple and the five publishers ... DOJ’s Latest on Apple Investigation
The Apple E-Book Kerfuffle Meets Alfred Marshall’s Principles of Economics
From a pure antitrust perspective, the real story behind the DOJ’s Apple e-book investigation is the Division’s deep commitment to the view that Most-Favored-Nation (MFN) clauses are anticompetitive (see also here), no doubt spurred on at least in part by Chief Economist Fiona Scott-Morton’s interesting work on the topic. Of course, there are other important ... The Apple E-Book Kerfuffle Meets Alfred Marshall’s Principles of Economics
Wright v. Rule at Columbia Law on Google and Antitrust
Charles (“Rick”) Rule, who represents Microsoft and is the head of the antitrust practice at Cadwalader, Wickersham & Taft LLP, and I had an opportunity to debate the various antitrust issues involving Google and its search engine on last week. I didn’t have much of a chance to report here on the blog over the ... Wright v. Rule at Columbia Law on Google and Antitrust
Competition for the Field on the Internet
Keith Woolcock (Time Business) offers an interesting perspective on what economists would describe as “competition for the field” between Apple, Facebook, Google, and Facebook. It gives a good sense of the many dimensions of competition upon which these firms compete. The upcoming IPO of Facebook, the flak surrounding Twitter’s decision to censor some tweets, and Google’s weaker-than-expected 4th-quarter ... Competition for the Field on the Internet
Fed should stay out of Google/Twitter social search spat
As has become customary with just about every new product announcement by Google these days, the company’s introduction on Tuesday of its new “Search, plus Your World” (SPYW) program, which aims to incorporate a user’s Google+ content into her organic search results, has met with cries of antitrust foul play. All the usual blustering and ... Fed should stay out of Google/Twitter social search spat
Some Much-Needed Antitrust Skepticism on Senate Letter Urging FTC Google Investigation
Back in September, the Senate Judiciary Committee’s Antitrust Subcommittee held a hearing on “The Power of Google: Serving Consumers or Threatening Competition?” Given the harsh questioning from the Subcommittee’s Chairman Herb Kohl (D-WI) and Ranking Member Mike Lee (R-UT), no one should have been surprised by the letter they sent yesterday to the Federal Trade ... Some Much-Needed Antitrust Skepticism on Senate Letter Urging FTC Google Investigation
Is Google Search Bias Consistent with Anticompetitive Foreclosure?
In my series of three posts (here, here and here) drawn from my empirical study on search bias I have examined whether search bias exists, and, if so, how frequently it occurs. This, the final post in the series, assesses the results of the study (as well as the Edelman & Lockwood (E&L) study to ... Is Google Search Bias Consistent with Anticompetitive Foreclosure?
In re Pool Corporation: Yet Another Peculiar and Peverse Section 5 Consent from the FTC
TOTM readers know that I’ve long been skeptical of claims that expansive use of Section 5 of the FTC Act will prove productive for consumers. I’ve been critical of recent applications of Section 5 such as Intel and N-Data. Now comes yet another FTC consent decree in PoolCorp. I’m still skeptical. Indeed, PoolCorp appears to ... In re Pool Corporation: Yet Another Peculiar and Peverse Section 5 Consent from the FTC
Extending & Rebutting Edelman & Lockwood on Search Bias
In my last post, I discussed Edelman & Lockwood’s (E&L’s) attempt to catch search engines in the act of biasing their results—as well as their failure to actually do so. In this post, I present my own results from replicating their study. Unlike E&L, I find that Bing is consistently more biased than Google, for ... Extending & Rebutting Edelman & Lockwood on Search Bias
Investigating Search Bias: Measuring Edelman & Lockwood’s Failure to Measure Bias in Search
Last week I linked to my new study on “search bias.” At the time I noted I would have a few blog posts in the coming days discussing the study. This is the first of those posts. A lot of the frenzy around Google turns on “search bias,” that is, instances when Google references its ... Investigating Search Bias: Measuring Edelman & Lockwood’s Failure to Measure Bias in Search
