Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Law Commons

Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®

Articles 1 - 15 of 15

Full-Text Articles in Law

Apple V. Pepper: Applying The Indirect Purchaser Rule To Online Platforms, Jason Wasserman Apr 2019

Apple V. Pepper: Applying The Indirect Purchaser Rule To Online Platforms, Jason Wasserman

Duke Journal of Constitutional Law & Public Policy Sidebar

Long-established antitrust precedent bars customers who buy a firm’s product through intermediaries from suing that firm for antitrust damages. In Apple Inc. v. Pepper, this “indirect purchaser rule” is brought into the smartphone age in a price-fixing dispute between technology giant Apple and iPhone users. This case will determine whether iPhone users buy smartphone applications directly from Apple through the App Store, or if Apple is merely an intermediary seller-agent of app developers. The indirect purchase rule is generally considered settled precedent. How the rule should apply to online platforms, however, differs between circuit courts, which have split on ...


Rwu First Amendment Blog: David Logan's Blog: Media Centralization Imperils Marketplace Of Ideas 04-05-2018, David A. Logan Apr 2018

Rwu First Amendment Blog: David Logan's Blog: Media Centralization Imperils Marketplace Of Ideas 04-05-2018, David A. Logan

Law School Blogs

No abstract provided.


Law School News: 'Marketplace Of Ideas' Imperiled (04-05-2018), David A. Logan Apr 2018

Law School News: 'Marketplace Of Ideas' Imperiled (04-05-2018), David A. Logan

Life of the Law School (1993- )

No abstract provided.


Rediscovering Capture: Antitrust Federalism And The North Carolina Dental Case, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Apr 2015

Rediscovering Capture: Antitrust Federalism And The North Carolina Dental Case, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law

This brief essay analyzes the Supreme Court's 2015 decision in the North Carolina Dental case, assessing its implications for federalism. The decision promises to re-open old divisions that had once made the antitrust "state action" doctrine a controversial lightning rod for debate about state economic sovereignty.

One provocative issue that neither the majority nor the dissenters considered is indicated by the fact that nearly all the cartel customers in the Dental case were located within the state. By contrast, the cartel in Parker v. Brown, which the dissent held up as the correct exemplar of the doctrine, benefited California ...


Progressive Legal Thought, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2015

Progressive Legal Thought, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law

A widely accepted model of American legal history is that "classical" legal thought, which dominated much of the nineteenth century, was displaced by "progressive" legal thought, which survived through the New Deal and in some form to this day. Within its domain, this was a revolution nearly on a par with Copernicus or Newton. This paradigm has been adopted by both progressive liberals who defend this revolution and by classical liberals who lament it.

Classical legal thought is generally identified with efforts to systematize legal rules along lines that had become familiar in the natural sciences. This methodology involved not ...


"The Magna Carta Of Free Enterprise" Really?" , Daniel A. Crane Jan 2013

"The Magna Carta Of Free Enterprise" Really?" , Daniel A. Crane

Articles

In U.S. v. Topco Associates, Inc., Justice Thurgood Marshall announced that "[a] ntitrust laws in general, and the Sherman Act in particular, are the Magna Carta of free enterprise.", In The Antitrust Constitution, Thomas Nachbar takes seriously the idea that federal antitrust laws serve a constitutional function. He argues that, contrary to common assumptions, the antitrust laws cannot be understood merely as a form of economic utilitarianism. Rather, they serve the additional purpose of preventing "regulatory harm," the assertion of law-like control over the conduct of others outside the sphere of one's own property interests.


Antitrust’S State Action Doctrine And The Ordinary Powers Of Corporations, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Oct 2012

Antitrust’S State Action Doctrine And The Ordinary Powers Of Corporations, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law

The Supreme Court has now agreed to review the Eleventh Circuit's decision in Phoebe-Putney, which held that a state statute permitting a hospital authority to acquire hospitals implicitly authorized such acquisitions when they were anticompetitive – in this particular case very likely facilitating a merger to monopoly. Under antitrust law’s “state action” doctrine a state may in fact authorize such an acquisition, provided that it “clearly articulates” its desire to approve an action that would otherwise constitute an antitrust violation and also “actively supervises” any private conduct that might fall under the state’s regulatory scheme.

“Authorization” in the ...


Business Interest Cases – October 2009 Term, Leon D. Lazer, Leon Friedman Jan 2011

Business Interest Cases – October 2009 Term, Leon D. Lazer, Leon Friedman

Scholarly Works

No abstract provided.


First Amendment Based Copyright Misuse, David S. Olson Mar 2010

First Amendment Based Copyright Misuse, David S. Olson

Boston College Law School Faculty Papers

We are at a crossroads with respect to the under-developed equitable defense of copyright misuse. The defense may go the way of its sibling, antitrust-based patent misuse, which seems to be in a state of inevitable decline. Or – if judges accept the proposal of this Article – courts could reinvigorate the copyright misuse defense to better protect First Amendment speech that is guaranteed by statute, but that is often chilled by copyright holders misusing their copyrights to control other’s speech. The Copyright Act serves First Amendment interests by encouraging authors to create works. But copyright law can also discourage the ...


Federalism And Antitrust Reform, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Oct 2005

Federalism And Antitrust Reform, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

Faculty Scholarship at Penn Law

Currently the Antitrust Modernization Commission is considering numerous proposals for adjusting the relationship between federal antitrust authority and state regulation. This essay examines two areas that have produced a significant amount of state-federal conflict: state regulation of insurance and the state action immunity for general state regulation. It argues that no principle of efficiency, regulatory theory, or federalism justifies the McCarran-Ferguson Act, which creates an antitrust immunity for state regulation of insurance. What few benefits the Act confers could be fully realized by an appropriate interpretation of the state action doctrine. Second, the current formulation of the antitrust state action ...


Looking Ahead To The 2005-06 Term (2005), Jonathan H. Adler Jan 2005

Looking Ahead To The 2005-06 Term (2005), Jonathan H. Adler

Faculty Publications

This essay surveys the upcoming 2005-06 term of the Supreme Court, a term that may be as notable for what it says about the future direction of the Supreme Court as it is for specific decisions in any particular cases. This does not mean the term lacks important cases. To the contrary, this coming year the Court will consider the constitutionality of the Solomon Amendment, address the application of the Religious Freedom Restoration Act to religious use of drugs, and determine whether the federal government can effectively preempt Oregon's decision to legalize doctor-assisted suicide. It will revisit contemporary federalism ...


Law And Information Platforms, Philip J. Weiser Jan 2002

Law And Information Platforms, Philip J. Weiser

Articles

No abstract provided.


Balancing State Sovereignty And Competition: An Analysis Of The Impact Of Seminole Tribe On The Antitrust State Action Immunity Doctrine, Susan Beth Farmer Jan 1997

Balancing State Sovereignty And Competition: An Analysis Of The Impact Of Seminole Tribe On The Antitrust State Action Immunity Doctrine, Susan Beth Farmer

Journal Articles

The great impact of the Seminole Tribe v. Florida decision will likely be felt in the range of federal causes of action that have exclusive remedies in federal court. Antitrust cases are among such causes of action. In seeking to avoid antitrust liability, defendants have invoked the protections of the antitrust state action doctrine, which immunizes only that anticompetitive activity imposed and supervised by states. This immunity bars suits against state and private actors alike. After Seminole Tribe, state defendants will escape all antitrust liability, whether or not the traditional requirements of the state action doctrine have been met. Thus ...


When First Amendment Values And Competition Policy Collide: Resolving The Dilemma Of Mixed-Motive Boycotts, Kay P. Kindred Jan 1992

When First Amendment Values And Competition Policy Collide: Resolving The Dilemma Of Mixed-Motive Boycotts, Kay P. Kindred

Scholarly Works

In a representative democracy, government must protect the rights of its citizens to express ideas, to voice grievances, and to seek to influence government. The first Amendment safeguards these fundamental political rights from government intrusion. In a free market economy, government must protect trade and commerce from activities and influences that lead to increased concentrations of economic power or that otherwise tend to restrain competition. The antitrust laws, specifically the Sherman Act, seek to safeguard the competitive process from restrictive trade practices. Conflict arises when efforts to influence government threaten to undermine competition.

Nowhere is the clash between First Amendment ...


Immunity From Regulatory Price Squeeze Claims: From Keogh, Parker, And Noerr To Town Of Concord And Beyond, Keith A. Rowley Jan 1991

Immunity From Regulatory Price Squeeze Claims: From Keogh, Parker, And Noerr To Town Of Concord And Beyond, Keith A. Rowley

Scholarly Works

On September 21, 1990, the First Circuit handed down its decision in Town of Concord, Massachusetts v. Boston Edison Co. This case, the most recent in a growing line of court of appeals decisions examining the antitrust implications of public utility rate structures, represents the first time a United States court of appeals has unequivocally stated that an antitrust action based upon a “price squeeze” could not be maintained against a utility whose wholesale and retail rates were both fully regulated. Town of Concord notwithstanding, the courts are far from agreeing whether investor-owned electric or natural gas utilities are immune ...