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

Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons

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

Articles 1 - 12 of 12

Full-Text Articles in Antitrust and Trade Regulation

Fraud On Airbnb: How To Regulate An Emerging And Problematic Industry, Samuel Mcneal Dec 2023

Fraud On Airbnb: How To Regulate An Emerging And Problematic Industry, Samuel Mcneal

Journal of the National Association of Administrative Law Judiciary

In Section I, this article explains the issues within Airbnb and why they need addressing. Section II explains the current state of Airbnb regulation and identifies the loopholes within that regulation that harm consumers. Section III shows why Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act protects Airbnb from some regulations, but why it also allows harm to persist against Airbnb. Section IV will posit that the Federal Trade Commission should oversee a broad, context-based regulation of Airbnb to protect consumers through a risk management reporting mechanism similar to the financial reporting to the Securities and Exchange Commission required under the …


Brief Of Administrative Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Opposition To Petitioners' Request For Reversal, Jeffrey Lubbers Aug 2023

Brief Of Administrative Law Scholars As Amici Curiae In Opposition To Petitioners' Request For Reversal, Jeffrey Lubbers

Amicus Briefs

Amici curiae are administrative law scholars from universities around the United States.

They are: • William D. Araiza, Professor of Law and Dean of Brooklyn Law School; • Blake Emerson, Professor of Law at UCLA School of Law; • Jeffrey Lubbers, Professor of Practice in Administrative Law at American University Washington College of Law; • Todd Phillips, Assistant Professor of Business Law at Georgia State University J. Mack Robinson College of Business; and • Beau Baumann, Doctoral candidate at Yale Law School.

Amici have a strong interest in how the Court’s decision will affect the field of administrative law and …


Comments On Federal Trade Commission Non-Compete Ban Proposed Rule, Matter No. P201200, Chaz D. Brooks Apr 2023

Comments On Federal Trade Commission Non-Compete Ban Proposed Rule, Matter No. P201200, Chaz D. Brooks

Articles in Law Reviews & Other Academic Journals

Within signed law professors and law students submitted this letter to the Federal Trade Commission, writing in their individual capacities, not as agents of their affiliated institutions, in support of the Federal Trade Commission’s proposed rule to ban most non-compete clauses (the “Proposal”) as an unfair method of competition.

This letter offers comments in response to areas where the FTC has requested public comment. To make our views clear, this letter contains the following sections: I. Summary of the Proposal; II. The Commission Should Consider Expanding Its Definition of Non-Compete Clauses to Prevent Employers from Requiring Workers to Quit Before …


A Suggested Revision Of The 2020 Vertical Merger Guidelines (July 2021), Steven C. Salop May 2021

A Suggested Revision Of The 2020 Vertical Merger Guidelines (July 2021), Steven C. Salop

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

The DOJ/ FTC Vertical Merger Guidelines (VMGs) were adopted by the FTC in June 2020 by a party-line 3-2 party line over the dissent of the Acting Chair. One might expect that the VMGs will be withdrawn and/or revised, now that there is a Democratic majority. Revision is appropriate because the VMGs are both incomplete and overly permissible. This Suggested Revision can aid that process.


Analyzing Vertical Mergers To Avoid False Negatives: Three Recent Case Studies, Steven C. Salop Apr 2019

Analyzing Vertical Mergers To Avoid False Negatives: Three Recent Case Studies, Steven C. Salop

Georgetown Law Faculty Publications and Other Works

This article analyzes three recent vertical mergers: a private antitrust case attacking the consummated merger of Jeld-Wen and Craftmaster Manufacturing Inc. (“CMI”) that was cleared by the DOJ in 2012 but subsequently litigated and won by the plaintiff, Steves & Sons in 2018; and two recent vertical merger matters investigated and cleared (with limited remedies) by 3-2 votes by the Federal Trade Commission in early 2019 -- Staples/Essendant and Fresenius/NxStage. There are some factual parallels among these three matters that make it interesting to analyze them together. First, the DOJ’s decision to clear Jeld-Wen/CMI merger appears to be a clear …


Does The Packers And Stockyards Act Require Antitrust Harm?, Herbert J. Hovenkamp Jan 2011

Does The Packers And Stockyards Act Require Antitrust Harm?, Herbert J. Hovenkamp

All Faculty Scholarship

The Packers and Stockyards Act was enacted in 1921. Congress was plainly influenced by the 1919 publication of a Federal Trade Commission Report on the meatpacking industry. Consistent with the FTC’s jurisdiction and concerns, the Report dealt with deceptive and unfair practices as well as practices that were believed to violate the antitrust laws. The language of the PSA does much the same, mixing the two. Of its seven specific prohibitions, three contain antitrust-like provisions requiring a lessening of competition. Two others reach unfair and tort-like conduct without any requirement of harm to competition. The remaining two reach both anticompetitive …


Brief Of Amicus Curiae American Antitrust Institute In Support Of Appellants And Reversal Of The District Court's Decision, Federal Trade Commission And State Of Minnesota V. Lundbeck, Inc. Nos. 10-3548 And 10-3549, United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth District (2011), Christopher L. Sagers, W. Joseph Bruckner, Richard M. Brunell Jan 2011

Brief Of Amicus Curiae American Antitrust Institute In Support Of Appellants And Reversal Of The District Court's Decision, Federal Trade Commission And State Of Minnesota V. Lundbeck, Inc. Nos. 10-3548 And 10-3549, United States Court Of Appeals For The Eighth District (2011), Christopher L. Sagers, W. Joseph Bruckner, Richard M. Brunell

Law Faculty Briefs and Court Documents

The basis for the District Court’s ruling was its view that cross-price elasticity of demand was “very low” between the two drugs acquired by Lundbeck, and therefore that they could not be in the same relevant market.2 AAI urges reversal on three grounds. First, assuming arguendo that crossprice elasticity was low – even if it were zero – the court’s approach fundamentally misapprehended the law. A lack of price competition between two functionally interchangeable products does not preclude a determination that they are in the same relevant market. Second, regardless of “low” cross-price elasticity, the acquisition removed an actual or …


Predatory Structured Finance, Christopher L. Peterson Sep 2006

Predatory Structured Finance, Christopher L. Peterson

ExpressO

Predatory lending is a real, pervasive, and destructive problem as demonstrated by record settlements, jury awards, media exposes, and a large body of empirical scholarship. Currently the national debate over predatory mortgage lending is shifting to the controversial question of who should bear liability for predatory lending practices. In today’s subprime mortgage market, originators and brokers quickly assign home loans through a complex and opaque series of transactions involving as many as a dozen different strategically organized companies. Loans are typically transferred into large pools, and then income from those loans is “structured” to appeal to different types of investors. …


90 Years And Two Days In Forty-Five Minutes, Stephen Calkins Jan 2005

90 Years And Two Days In Forty-Five Minutes, Stephen Calkins

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.


California Dental Association: Not The Quick Look But Not The Full Monty, Stephen Calkins Jan 2000

California Dental Association: Not The Quick Look But Not The Full Monty, Stephen Calkins

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.


The Kirkpatrick Committee--Objectives And Procedures, Stephen Calkins Jan 1989

The Kirkpatrick Committee--Objectives And Procedures, Stephen Calkins

Law Faculty Research Publications

No abstract provided.


Developments In Merger Litigation: The Government Doesn't Always Win, Stephen Calkins Jan 1988

Developments In Merger Litigation: The Government Doesn't Always Win, Stephen Calkins

Law Faculty Research Publications

"The sole consistency that I can find is that under Section 7, the Government always wins." When this famous antitrust apothegm was pronounced in 1966 by Justice Stewart, dissenting in United States v. Von's Grocery, it had the ring of truth. It is less true today: of the (admittedly few) reported Justice Department merger cases decided since William Baxter assumed responsibility as Assistant Attorney General, the Government has lost all but one. The Federal Trade Commission's court record in merger cases has been substantially better. Even in private cases, usually involving challenges to mergers to which the federal antitrust …