Showing archive for: “Platforms”
NPU: Political Economy Without Economics
It appears that a new branch has forked off from the “hipster” neo-Brandeisian approach toward regulation, which styles itself as the study of “networks, platforms, and utilities” (NPU). Beginning with the 2022 publication of the “Networks, Platforms, and Utilities: Law and Policy” casebook by Morgan Ricks, Ganesh Sitaraman, Shelley Welton, and Lev Menand, NPU has ... NPU: Political Economy Without Economics
The Google Remedies Decision and Big Tech Antitrust
U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta’s Sept. 2 remedies opinion in the U.S. v. Google monopolization (Google Search) case is, in large part, a rejection of government regulation of digital platforms in the guise of antitrust. The limited and cabined conduct-related remedies it imposes are far less significant than its rejection of the U.S. Justice Department’s (DOJ) proposed conduct ... The Google Remedies Decision and Big Tech Antitrust
Network Effects in FTC v Meta
The Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) ongoing antitrust case against Meta has brought network effects into the spotlight, as the agency’s complaint and opening statement both lean heavily on networks as a source of competitive harm. But the commission’s arguments fundamentally misunderstand how network effects interact with competition in digital markets. Far from being solely anticompetitive ... Network Effects in FTC v Meta
A Tale of Two App Stores
Dueling federal antitrust holdings dealing with app stores could have significant impacts on the future of competition in mobile-internet services. Going forward, antitrust policy in this area should focus on promoting consumer welfare and innovation, rather than the interests of particular competitors. App Store Basics Google and Apple compete vigorously for consumer favor in smartphones. ... A Tale of Two App Stores
Prudence and Precedent Counsel Modest Remedies in Google Search Case
Later this fall, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia will hold hearings to determine the proper remedy in the Google search case. Among other options, the court could restrict Google’s ability to sign exclusive distribution contracts, force it to share data with competitors, or even break Google apart into two or more ... Prudence and Precedent Counsel Modest Remedies in Google Search Case
Google Monopolization Ruling May Not Hold Up On Appeal
In an Aug. 5 order, the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia held that Google engaged in illegal monopolization of internet “general search services” and “general text search advertising.” This decision, dubbed “an historic win for the American people” by U.S. Attorney General Merrick Garland, may face tough sledding on appeal. The very ... Google Monopolization Ruling May Not Hold Up On Appeal
Judge Mehta Got It Wrong in the Google Case
U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta ruled in an Aug. 5 order that Google violated antitrust law by improperly maintaining a monopoly. The case focused on “general search engines” (GSEs) used for internet search, and the impropriety was the manner through which Google secured distribution in partnering with internet-browser developers, mobile-device manufacturers, and wireless carriers. ... Judge Mehta Got It Wrong in the Google Case
Shining the Light of Economics on the Google Case
The U.S. Justice Department has presented its evidence in the antitrust case alleging that Google unlawfully maintained a monopoly over “general search services” by “lock[ing] up distribution channels” through “exclusionary agreements” with makers and marketers of devices. Google’s agreements with Apple, for example, have made its search engine the default in Apple’s Safari browser. The ... Shining the Light of Economics on the Google Case
An FTC Complaint Against Amazon Gets Personal
There is much in the Federal Trade Commission’s (FTC) record over the past two years that could be categorized as abnormal. There is, for instance, nothing “normal” about using the threat of excessive force to cower businesses into submission. Introducing sky high costs for the filing of mergers isn’t normal, as it will scare away ... An FTC Complaint Against Amazon Gets Personal
South Africa’s Competition Proposal Takes Europe’s DMA Model to the Extreme
The South African Competition Commission (SACC) has proposed changes to the nation’s digital-market regulation that could deal a significant blow to an already struggling South African economy. Ostensibly intended to protect online competition, the SACC’s plan to reshape the business models of “online intermediation platforms” like Google and Booking.com would entail a radical departure from traditional competition regulation. This ... South Africa’s Competition Proposal Takes Europe’s DMA Model to the Extreme
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
Biweekly FTC Roundup: Antitrust Woodstock Edition
Last week’s roundup was postponed because I was kibbitzing at the spring meeting of the American Bar Association (ABA) Antitrust Section. For those outside the antitrust world, the spring meeting is the annual antitrust version of Woodstock. For those inside the antitrust world: Antitrust Woodstock is not really a thing. At the planetary-orbit level, the ... Biweekly FTC Roundup: Antitrust Woodstock Edition
