Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
Articles 1 - 8 of 8
Full-Text Articles in Law
Labor Organization In Ride-Sharing: Unionization Or Cartelization?, Mark Anderson
Labor Organization In Ride-Sharing: Unionization Or Cartelization?, Mark Anderson
Articles
The sharing economy brings together the constituent parts of a business enterprise into a structure that, on its surface, resembles a business firm, but in crucial ways is nothing like the traditional firm. This includes the ownership of the primary capital assets used in the business, as well as one of the most fundamental features of a firm-the relationship with its labor force. Sharing economy workers are formally contractors, running small businesses as sole entrepreneurs, with the effect that they are excluded from many of the protections made available to workers across the economy. The result is a seeming disparity …
Sharing Economy Meets The Sherman Act: Is Uber A Firm, A Cartel, Or Something In Between?, Mark Anderson
Sharing Economy Meets The Sherman Act: Is Uber A Firm, A Cartel, Or Something In Between?, Mark Anderson
Articles
The sharing economy is a new industrial structure that is made possible by instantaneous internet communication and changes in the life, work, and purchasing habits of individual entrepreneurs and consumers. Antitrust law is an economic regulatory scheme dating back to 1890 in the United States that is designed to address centrally controlled concentrations of economic power and the threats that those concentrations pose to consumer interests and economic efficiency. In order to accommodate a modern enterprise structure in which thousands or millions of independent contractors join forces to provide a service by agreement among themselves, antitrust law requires re-envisioning and …
The Enigma Of The Single Entity, Mark Anderson
Iqbal, Twombly, And The Expected Cost Of False Positive Error, Mark Anderson
Iqbal, Twombly, And The Expected Cost Of False Positive Error, Mark Anderson
Articles
Iqbal and Twombly introduced a new standard for pleading federal claims by overruling five-decades old language from Conley v. Gibson. Instead of plaintiffs being entitled to discovery unless the complaint affirmatively forecloses the possibility of recovery, Iqbal and Twombly require a more searching evaluation of the complaint under an ambiguous "plausibility" standard. The policy behind this increased burden on plaintiffs is to prevent the false positive error that burdensome discovery creates. How the plausibility standard from Iqbal and Twombly should operate in the real world is poorly understood. There is general acknowledgement that no clear guidance exists about how to …
The False Duality Of Efficiency And Predation In The Analysis Of Monopolizing Conduct, Mark Anderson
The False Duality Of Efficiency And Predation In The Analysis Of Monopolizing Conduct, Mark Anderson
Articles
No abstract provided.
Post-Trial Motions In Private Antitrust Actions: A Practitioner's Guide, John E. Rumel
Post-Trial Motions In Private Antitrust Actions: A Practitioner's Guide, John E. Rumel
Articles
No abstract provided.
Federalism And Conspiracy: Is Governmentally Compelled Conduct Per Se Lawful Under Section 1 Of The Sherman Act?, Mark Anderson
Federalism And Conspiracy: Is Governmentally Compelled Conduct Per Se Lawful Under Section 1 Of The Sherman Act?, Mark Anderson
Articles
No abstract provided.
Vertical Agreements Under Section 1 Of The Sherman Act: Results In Search Of Reasons, Mark Anderson
Vertical Agreements Under Section 1 Of The Sherman Act: Results In Search Of Reasons, Mark Anderson
Articles
The application of section 1 of the Sherman Act to resale restrictions imposed by a supplier of goods requires an analysis of whether such restrictions result from an agreement and, if so, the standard applicable to the restriction. Each of these issues is a source of continuing controversy. The present position of the United States Supreme Court on the agreement issue is a product of two inappropriate influences. First, the Court has attempted to accommodate disparate interests reflected in the debate over the standards that should be applied once an agreement is proven. Second, the Court has resurrected the Colgate …