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

Law Commons

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

Articles 1 - 17 of 17

Full-Text Articles in Law

Troubled Waters Between U.S. And European Antitrust, D. Daniel Sokol Oct 2019

Troubled Waters Between U.S. And European Antitrust, D. Daniel Sokol

D. Daniel Sokol

Antitrust is an important area of law and policy for most companies in the world. Having divergent rules across antitrust systems means that the same economic behavior may be treated differently depending on the jurisdiction, leading to disparate outcomes in which one jurisdiction finds illegal behavior (but the other does not) when the underlying behavior may be pro-competitive. This disparate set of outcomes creates a world in which the most stringent antitrust system may produce the global standard. As a result, if the antitrust rules applied are too rigid, they threaten to hurt consumers not merely in the jurisdiction where …


Framing Franchise Antitrust Litigation: The Legacy Of Kodak And Queen City Pizza, Randy D. Gordon Jun 2018

Framing Franchise Antitrust Litigation: The Legacy Of Kodak And Queen City Pizza, Randy D. Gordon

Randy D. Gordon

A decade ago, many antitrust commentators were predicting a “revival” of franchise antitrust claims flowing in the wake of Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. The thinking was that Kodak’s recognition of a claim for monopolization of an “aftermarket” for parts and services separate from each other and from a primary product might be extended to cover franchise relationships in which the franchisee is required to purchase fungible products from its franchisor, even though those products could be purchased elsewhere on more favorable terms. Fairly quickly, though, the Third Circuit decided Queen City Pizza, Inc. v. Domino’s Pizza, …


Antitrust, Innovation, And Product Design In Platform Markets: Microsoft And Intel, William H. Page, Seldon J. Childers Aug 2015

Antitrust, Innovation, And Product Design In Platform Markets: Microsoft And Intel, William H. Page, Seldon J. Childers

William H. Page

The Antitrust Division’s Microsoft case and the Federal Trade Commission’s Intel case both rested on claims that antitrust intervention was necessary to preserve innovation in technological platforms at the heart of the personal computer. Yet, because those very platforms support markets that are among the most innovative in the American economy, injudicious intervention might well have jeopardized the very innovation that antitrust should promote. In this article, we review the role of platforms in technological innovation and consider how antitrust standards should apply to them. We then examine how Microsoft resolved antitrust issues affecting platform design at various stages of …


Competition Policy And Comparative Corporate Governance Of State-Owned Enterprises, D. Daniel Sokol Nov 2014

Competition Policy And Comparative Corporate Governance Of State-Owned Enterprises, D. Daniel Sokol

D. Daniel Sokol

The legal origins literature overlooks a key area of corporate governance-the governance of state-owned enterprises ("SOEs"). There are key theoretical differences between SOEs and publicly-traded corporations. In comparing the differences of both internal and external controls of SOEs, none of the existing legal origins allow for effective corporate governance monitoring. Because of the difficulties of undertaking a cross-country quantitative review of the governance of SOEs, this Article examines, through a series of case studies, SOE governance issues among postal providers. The examination of postal firms supports the larger theoretical claim about the weaknesses of SOE governance across legal origins. In …


Antitrust Energy, D. Daniel Sokol, Barak Orbach Nov 2014

Antitrust Energy, D. Daniel Sokol, Barak Orbach

D. Daniel Sokol

Marking the centennial anniversary of Standard Oil Co. v. United States, we argue that much of the critique of antitrust enforcement and the skepticism about its social significance suffer from “Nirvana fallacy” — comparing existing and feasible policies to ideal normative policies, and concluding that the existing and feasible ones are inherently inefficient because of their imperfections. Antitrust law and policy have always been and will always be imperfect. However, they are alive and kicking. The antitrust discipline is vibrant, evolving, and global. This essay introduces a number of important innovations in scholarship related to Standard Oil and its modern …


Standard Oil And U.S. Steel: Predation And Collusion In The Law Of Monopolization And Mergers, William H. Page Nov 2014

Standard Oil And U.S. Steel: Predation And Collusion In The Law Of Monopolization And Mergers, William H. Page

William H. Page

The Supreme Court’s 1911 decision in Standard Oil gave us embryonic versions of two foundational standards of liability under the Sherman Act: the rule of reason under Section 1 and the monopoly power/exclusionary conduct test under Section 2. But a case filed later in 1911, United States v. United States Steel Corporation, shaped the understanding of Standard Oil’s standards of liability for decades. U.S. Steel, eventually decided by the Supreme Court in 1920, upheld the 1901 merger that created "the Corporation," as U.S. Steel was known. The majority found that the efforts of the Corporation and its rivals to control …


Monopolization, Innovation, And Consumer Welfare, John Lopatka, William Page Nov 2014

Monopolization, Innovation, And Consumer Welfare, John Lopatka, William Page

William H. Page

While most commentators and the enforcement agencies voice support for the consumer welfare standard, substantial disagreement exists over when economic theory justifies a presumption of consumer injury. Virtually all would subscribe to the theoretical prediction that an effective cartel will likely inflict consumer injury by reducing output and thus increasing prices. But the academic and judicial consensus disappears when the theory at issue predicts that a practice -- a merger or a predatory pricing campaign, for example -- will harm consumers in the future through some complex sequence of events.

In our view, the desire to protect innovation is legitimate, …


Unilateral, Anticompetitive Acquisitions Of Dominance Or Monopoly Power, Avishalom Tor Nov 2013

Unilateral, Anticompetitive Acquisitions Of Dominance Or Monopoly Power, Avishalom Tor

Avishalom Tor

The prohibition of certain types of anticompetitive unilateral conduct by firms possessing a substantial degree of market power is a cornerstone of competition law regimes worldwide. Yet notwithstanding the social costs of monopoly modern legal regimes refrain from prohibiting it outright. Instead, competition laws prohibit monopolies or dominant firms from engaging in those types of anticompetitive conduct that amount to monopolizing or an abuse of dominant position. Importantly, anticompetitive conduct can take place both on the road to monopoly and, later on, once substantial market power has been achieved. Legal regimes nevertheless tend either to ignore or pay only limited …


Introduction: Expansion And Contraction In Monopolization Law, Michael S. Gal, Spencer Weber Waller, Avishalom Tor Nov 2013

Introduction: Expansion And Contraction In Monopolization Law, Michael S. Gal, Spencer Weber Waller, Avishalom Tor

Avishalom Tor

This article introduces a special symposium issue of the Antitrust Law Journal based on a conference on monopolization. It argues that monopolization law has been experiencing simultaneous expansion and contraction processes that are not wholly contradictory but at least partly complementary. Specifically, the authors suggest that the contraction of monopolization law in the United States and the EU might serve to facilitate its expansion and increased importance worldwide, providing other antitrust regimes with more focused and effective tools to address the challenges involved in regulating dominant firms. Moreover, monopolization law's increased reach internationally also has made its refinement and rationalization …


Developments In Section Two Of The Sherman Act, Joseph P. Bauer Oct 2013

Developments In Section Two Of The Sherman Act, Joseph P. Bauer

Joseph P. Bauer

The issues raised in this Symposium are of great interest and timeliness. During the 1940s and 1950s, the Supreme Court explored the role of Section 2 of the Sherman Act as an essential element in the antitrust regime. As was true with antitrust generally, courts expanded the reach of Section 2, frequently concluding that the complained-of conduct constituted unlawful monopolization or attempts to monopolize, and approving injunctions forbidding the continuation of exclusionary or predatory practices and orders leading to the breakup of the monopoly itself. However, after the Grinnell decision in 1966, and the Otter Tail case almost a decade …


Introduction: Expansion And Contraction In Monopolization Law, Michael S. Gal, Spencer Weber Waller, Avishalom Tor Sep 2013

Introduction: Expansion And Contraction In Monopolization Law, Michael S. Gal, Spencer Weber Waller, Avishalom Tor

Spencer Weber Waller

This article introduces a special symposium issue of the Antitrust Law Journal based on a conference on monopolization. It argues that monopolization law has been experiencing simultaneous expansion and contraction processes that are not wholly contradictory but at least partly complementary. Specifically, the authors suggest that the contraction of monopolization law in the United States and the EU might serve to facilitate its expansion and increased importance worldwide, providing other antitrust regimes with more focused and effective tools to address the challenges involved in regulating dominant firms. Moreover, monopolization law's increased reach internationally also has made its refinement and rationalization …


Corporate Governance And Competition Policy, Spencer Weber Waller Jan 2011

Corporate Governance And Competition Policy, Spencer Weber Waller

Spencer Weber Waller

Corporate Governance and Competition Policy

Spencer Weber Waller

Abstract

Corporate governance law addresses the misaligned incentives between officers and directors of publicly-owned companies and their shareholders, and how this can lead to the destruction of shareholder value. Antitrust law governs the interaction between corporations and other economic actors in the marketplace and prohibits and penalizes anticompetitive agreements, unilateral conduct which unreasonably injures competition, and mergers and acquisitions which may substantially lessen competition.

This article explores the puzzling lack of meaningful interaction between these two fields of law which govern the internal and external operations of key economic players in our …


Reviving An Epithet: A New Way Forward For The Essential Facilities Doctrine, Sandeep Vaheesan Aug 2010

Reviving An Epithet: A New Way Forward For The Essential Facilities Doctrine, Sandeep Vaheesan

Sandeep Vaheesan

For sound economic reasons, the antitrust laws, in general, do not require firms to share their assets with rivals. When a particular asset has natural monopoly characteristics and is used as an input in other markets, however, the essential facilities doctrine requires that the asset be shared with firms in related markets. In recent decades, the Supreme Court and leading scholars have criticized the doctrine, claiming it is economically inefficient and taxes the institutional capacity of the judiciary.

Historically, the courts most often applied the doctrine to tangible natural monopolies like electric transmission grids and bottleneck railroad lines. In recent …


An Antitrust Analysis Of The Google Book Search Settlement, Laura J.J. Wang Feb 2010

An Antitrust Analysis Of The Google Book Search Settlement, Laura J.J. Wang

Jianji Wang

The Google Book Search settlement has raised intense debates on its far-reaching effects on copyright and digital distribution of books. This paper focuses on three issues that raise antitrust and competition concerns. First, the Books Rights Registry created by the settlement is not a cartel of the authors. Due to an author’s ability to opt out from the settlement or to set an independent price for the books, the Registry cannot act as a cartel because it lacks a price control function. Second, Google does not violate the section 2 of the Sherman Act by monopolizing the digital books. The …


Conscious Parallelism Revisited, Reza Dibadj Dec 2009

Conscious Parallelism Revisited, Reza Dibadj

Reza Dibadj

Conscious parallelism, sometimes called tacit collusion, occurs where firms adopt their business practices based on what other firms are doing, rather than competing for customers. The most obvious manifestation occurs where prices across companies in an industry not only become suspiciously similar, but also change rapidly in strikingly parallel ways. Suggested examples are legion and varied: airline tickets, gasoline, cellular phone text messaging and roaming rates, interest rates on bank accounts, credit card interchange fees, movie tickets, recorded music, breakfast cereals, real estate and travel agent commissions, electricity prices in deregulated markets, and air cargo fuel surcharges, just to name …


Framing Franchise In Antitrust Litigation-The Legacy Of Kodak And Queen City Pizza.Pdf, Randy D. Gordon Dec 2009

Framing Franchise In Antitrust Litigation-The Legacy Of Kodak And Queen City Pizza.Pdf, Randy D. Gordon

Randy D. Gordon

A decade ago, many antitrust commentators were predicting a “revival” of franchise antitrust claims flowing in the wake of Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, Inc. The thinking was that Kodak’s recognition of a claim for monopolization of an “aftermarket” for parts and services separate from each other and from a primary product might be extended to cover franchise relationships in which the franchisee is required to purchase fungible products from its franchisor, even though those products could be purchased elsewhere on more favorable terms. Fairly quickly, though, the Third Circuit decided Queen City Pizza, Inc. v. Domino’s Pizza, …


Article 82: Gestalt, Myths, Lessons, Reza Dibadj Dec 2006

Article 82: Gestalt, Myths, Lessons, Reza Dibadj

Reza Dibadj

Article 82 of the Treaty Establishing the European Community, which prohibits abuse of a dominant position, is the counterpart to the anti-monopolization provisions contained in Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Unfortunately, however, commentators have variously criticized recent applications of Article 82 as outdated, protectionist, inconsistent - and perhaps most damaging of all, based on faulty economics. This paper takes issue with these critiques to offer support for a robust Article 82. Narrow analyses focused on the provision's language or specific judicial decisions offer little insight. Rather, an appreciation for Article 82 can only emerge through a richer contextual analysis …