Showing archive for: “Sherman Antitrust Act”
Does the Voluntary Industry “Agreement” to Ban Phosphates in Dishwasher Detergents Violate Section 1?
Apparently, the detergent industry has entered into what has been described as a “voluntary agreement” to reduce the use of phosphates in detergents (HT: Ted Frank). A press release from Clean Water Action describes the agreement as follows: On July 1, 2010 a voluntary ban on phosphates in dishwasher detergents will be implemented by many ... Does the Voluntary Industry “Agreement” to Ban Phosphates in Dishwasher Detergents Violate Section 1?
DOJ Gears Up To Challenge Proposed Google-ITA Merger
The WSJ reports that the DOJ is getting itself ready to challenge the Google-ITA merger (see earlier TOTM posts here and here): Justice Department staff lawyers have begun preparing legal documents for use in a possible court challenge to the $700 million deal for ITA Software Inc., but no decision to proceed has been made, ... DOJ Gears Up To Challenge Proposed Google-ITA Merger
The FTC and Debarment as an Antitrust Sanction
As a result of the FTC’s “Operation Short Change,” a number of firms and individuals have settled claims that they swindled millions from consumers by making unauthorized charges and debits to their bank accounts. The FTC press release highlights that, in addition to a $2.08 million fine (judgment suspended due to bankruptcy filing), the FTC ... The FTC and Debarment as an Antitrust Sanction
Why can’t we have a better press corps?: WaPo Google antitrust edition
Steven Pearlstein at the Washington Post asks if it’s “Time to loosen Google’s grip.” The article is an analytical mess. Pearlstein is often a decent business reporter–I’m not sure what went wrong here, but this is a pretty shoddy piece of antitrust journalism. For the most part, the article is a series of tired claims ... Why can’t we have a better press corps?: WaPo Google antitrust edition
What’s An Internet Monopolist? A Reply to Professor Wu
We’ve been reading with interest a bit of an blog squabble between Tim Wu and Adam Thierer ( see here and here) set off by Professor Wu’s WSJ column: “In the Grip of the New Monopolists.” Wu’s column makes some remarkable claims, and, like Adam, we find it extremely troubling. Wu starts off with some ... What’s An Internet Monopolist? A Reply to Professor Wu
DOJ v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan
This should be an interesting case to watch. As I’ve discussed, if one excludes policy speeches and restricts focus to enforcement action and activity, it has been thus far difficult to distinguish the Obama Antitrust Division from the Bush II Antitrust Division when it comes to single firm or allegedly exclusionary conduct. But the DOJ’s ... DOJ v. Blue Cross Blue Shield of Michigan
Antitrust and Congress
Last Thursday and Friday, I attended a conference at Case Western Law School on the Roberts Court’s business law decisions. I presented a paper on the Court’s antitrust decisions. (The paper, described here, is now available on SSRN.) Adam Pritchard, Matt Bodie, and Brian Fitzpatrick presented papers considering the Court’s treatment of, respectively, securities law, ... Antitrust and Congress
The Microsoft-Google Antitrust Wars and Public Choice: There is Too An Argument Against Rival Involvement in Antitrust Enforcement
How should an economist interpret the fact that Microsoft appears to be “behind” recent enforcement actions against Google in the United States and, especially, in Europe? “With skepticism!” Is the answer I suspect many readers will offer upon first glance. There is a long public choice literature, and long history in antitrust itself, that suggests ... The Microsoft-Google Antitrust Wars and Public Choice: There is Too An Argument Against Rival Involvement in Antitrust Enforcement
State Antitrust Law in Action
A predatory pricing case in California under Section 17043 results in a $21 million fine awarded to one newspaper, the Bay Guardian, in a suit against a competitor, San Francisco Weekly (HT: Reason). The suit alleged that the SF Weekly was selling advertising below cost for the purpose of harming a competitor. A summary of ... State Antitrust Law in Action
The CARE Act and State Regulation of Alcohol Distribution: The Competitive and Social Effects of Post and Hold Laws
In an earlier post on the CARE Act, I highlighted the fact that the law would essentially immunize state laws regulating the distribution and sale of beer, wine and liquor wholesalers from challenge under the Commerce clause and the Sherman Act. For more details on the CARE Act, see the earlier post, but the bottom ... The CARE Act and State Regulation of Alcohol Distribution: The Competitive and Social Effects of Post and Hold Laws
First reactions to the Intel Settlement
I just finished watching the FTC webcast announcing the Intel settlement and did a quick read over the agreement itself. Some quick high-level reactions: The tone of the press conference was triumphant, of course. Leibowitz claimed that the FTC got 22 out of 26 of the remedies proposed in the complaint and that Intel, which ... First reactions to the Intel Settlement
Who CAREs About Beer and Wine Consumers?
The Comprehensive Alcohol Regulatory Effectiveness Act — yes, the “CARE Act” — or HR 5034, is a piece of legislation aimed at supporting “State-based alcohol regulation.” Recall the Supreme Court’s decision in Granholm v. Heald, which held that states could either allow in-state and out-of-state retailers to directly ship wine to consumers or could prohibit ... Who CAREs About Beer and Wine Consumers?
