Antitrust and Trade Regulation Commons^™

Financial Hospitals: Defending The Fed’S Role As Market Maker Of Last Resort, Jose M. Gabilondo

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Marks, Morals, And Markets, Jeremy N. Sheff

Faculty Publications

The prevailing justification for trademark law depends on economic arguments that cannot account for much of the law's recent development, nor for mounting empirical evidence that consumer decisionmaking is inconsistent with assumptions of rational choice. But the only extant theoretical alternative to economic analysis is a Lockean "natural rights" theory that scholars have found even more unsatisfying. This Article proposes a third option. I analyze the law of trademarks and unfair competition as a system of moral obligations between producers and consumers. Drawing on the contractualist tradition in moral philosophy, I develop and apply a new theoretical framework to evaluate …

Antitrust Law And Economic Theory: Finding A Balance, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

Over the past forty years, the federal courts have relied more and more on economic theory to inform their antitrust analyses. Economic theory has indeed provided guidance with respect to antitrust issues and assisted the courts in reaching rational outcomes. At the same time, infusion of economic evidence into antitrust cases has made these cases more complex, lengthier, more expensive to litigate, and less predictable.

This Article argues that courts need to restore the balance between facts and economic theory in undertaking antitrust analysis. The problem is not that judges and juries cannot reach good outcomes in antitrust cases, but …

Competition Policy And The Great Depression: Lessons Learned And A New Way Forward, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

The recent Great Recession has shaken the nation’s faith in free markets and inspired various forms of actual or proposed regulatory intervention displacing free competition. Proponents of such intervention often claim that such interference with free-market outcomes will help foster economic recovery and thus macroeconomic stability by, for instance, enhancing the “purchasing power” of workers or reducing consumer prices. Such arguments for increased economic centralization echo those made during the Great Depression, when proponents of regulatory intervention claimed that such interference with economic liberty and free competition, including suspension of the antitrust laws, was necessary to foster economic recovery. Indeed, …

Section 2 Enforcement And The Great Recession: Why Less (Enforcement) Might Mean More (Gdp), Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

The Great Recession has provoked calls for more vigorous regulation in all sectors, including antitrust enforcement. After President Obama took office, the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice abandoned the Bush Administration’s standard of liability under section 2 of the Sherman Act, which forbids unlawful monopolization, as insufficiently interventionist. Based on the premise that similarly lax antitrust enforcement caused and deepened the Great Depression, the Obama Administration outlined a more intrusive and consumer-focused approach to section 2 enforcement as part of a larger national strategy to combat the “extreme” economic crisis the nation was then facing.

This Essay draws …

The Rule Of Reason Re-Examined, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

This article analyzes the application of the Rule of Reason as articulated by Justice Brandeis in Chicago Board of Trade v. United States to alleged restraints of trade in violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act. It argues that the Brandeis formulation, which requires courts to consider a broad range of economic factors and then weigh procompetitive benefits against anticompetitive effects, has proven unwieldy in the hands of trial judges. Because the Brandeis formulation provides little guidance as to how these factors should be weighed, courts have struggled to develop clear, predictable, and consistent standards under section 1. This …

Standard Oil As Lochner's Trojan Horse, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Appropriate Liability Rules For Tying And Bundled Discounting, Thom Lambert

Faculty Publications

This article asserts a comprehensive response to Elhauge’s provocative arguments. With respect to tying, the article shows that governing Supreme Court precedent does not deem the non-foreclosure “power” effects of the practice to be anticompetitive and that those effects are unlikely to reduce social welfare in the long run, especially after accounting for dynamic efficiencies. With respect to bundled discounting, the article shows that Elhauge’s proposed liability rule is both inapposite to consumer harm and inadministrable and that both “linked” market foreclosure and a form of below-cost pricing are necessary for anticompetitive harm and should therefore be prerequisites to antitrust …

The Roberts Court And The Limits Of Antitrust, Thom Lambert

Faculty Publications

This article first describes the fundamental limits of antitrust and the decision-theoretic approach such limits inspire. It then analyzes the Roberts Court’s antitrust decisions, explaining how each coheres with the decision-theoretic model. Finally, it predicts how the Court will address three issues likely to come before it in the future: tying, loyalty rebates, and bundled discounts.

The Ftaia And Claims By Foreign Plaintiffs Under State Law, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In Empagran, the Supreme Court construed the Foreign Trade Antitrust Improvements Act (FTAIA) to severely limit the extraterritorial reach of the Sherman Act. In the wake of Empagran and the D.C. Circuit’s subsequent ruling on remand in that case, foreign plaintiffs asserting claims under U.S. antitrust laws for injuries based on transactions consummated abroad have been largely shut out of federal courts. Foreign plaintiffs, however, have not abandoned their efforts to obtain relief in American courts for anticompetitive acts committed in the international arena. Rather, they have turned to claims under various state laws, including state antitrust laws, …

Making Sense Of Twombly, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In May 2007, the United States Supreme Court decided Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly and sent shockwaves throughout the federal civil justice system. Reversing the Second Circuit, the Court held that an antitrust complaint that alleged mere parallel behavior among rival telecommunications companies, coupled with stray averments of agreement that amounted merely to legal conclusions, failed as a matter of law to state a claim for conspiracy in violation of § 1 of the Sherman Act and had been properly dismissed by the trial court. The Court then proceeded to (1) redefine the concept of notice pleading by "retiring" …

Reframing Antitrust In Light Of Scientific Revolution: Accounting For Transaction Costs In Rule Of Reason Analysis, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

This Article contends that modern rule of reason analysis, informed by workable competition’s partial equilibrium trade-off paradigm, is suitable for evaluating only a subset of agreements that may reduce transaction costs. The Article distinguishes between “technological” and “non-technological” transaction costs. Technological transaction costs entail the bargaining and information costs first emphasized by Ronald Coase, while non-technological transaction costs result from more fundamental departures from perfect competition, departures creating a risk of opportunism that accompanies relationship-specific investments. Modern law does accurately assess restraints that may reduce technological transaction costs—costs that are analogous to the sort of production costs recognized by the …

Federal Pleading And State Presuit Discovery, Scott Dodson

Faculty Publications

This Article explores the role that state presuit discovery could play in rectifying the information imbalance caused by Twombly and Iqbal - when a plaintiff in federal court requires information in the hands (or minds) of defendants or third parties in order to properly plead her claim, but such information is not discoverable unless the claim can survive a motion to dismiss. First, this Article provides an account of the development of federal pleading standards from before Twombly through their current post-Iqbal state. Second, this Article describes the effects of the post-Iqbal federal pleading standards and highlights the harsh results …

Debunking The Purchaser Welfare Account Of Section 2 Of The Sherman Act: How Harvard Brought Us A Total Welfare Standard And Why We Should Keep It, Alan J. Meese

Faculty Publications

The last several years have seen a vigorous debate among antitrust scholars and practitionersa bout the appropriates tandardf or evaluating the conduct of monopolists under section 2 of the Sherman Act. While most of the debate over possible standards has focused on the empirical question of each standard's economic utility, this Article undertakes a somewhat different task: It examines the normative benchmark that courts have actually chosen when adjudicating section 2 cases. This Article explores three possible benchmarks-producer welfare, purchaser welfare, and total welfare-and concludes that courts have opted for a total welfare normative approach to section 2 since the …

The Private Antitrust Remedy: Lessons From The American Experience, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

The treble damage remedy has been a centerpiece of private antitrust enforcement since the enactment of the Sherman Act in 1890. Aware that government resources were limited, Congress created the private right of action as a complement to public enforcement to assure the detection and prosecution of antitrust offenders. The private right of action has proven to be a very potent weapon in the civil enforcement arsenal. It is the very potency of the private remedy, however, that has made the private right of action a target of criticism by defendants and, more recently, the courts. Indeed, in the …

Pharmaceutical Reverse Payment Settlements: Presumptions, Procedural Burdens, And Covenants Not To Sue Generic Drug Manufacturers, Catherine J. K. Sandoval

Faculty Publications

This Article analyzes recent developments in antitrust law, focusing on agreements between pharmaceutical patent holders and generic drug manufacturers that require a generic manufacturer to delay its market entry in exchange for a payment or other consideration from the patent holder. A predictable consequence of settlements that delay the marketing of a generic drug is that prices for the patented drug will remain higher than if the generic competitor had prevailed in its challenge to the patent's validity or the patent holder had failed to show that the generic infringed on its patent. Analysis of the legality of these settlements …

Book Review: Reviewing Part Iii Of Innovation For The 21st Century: Harnessing The Power Of Intellectual Property And Antitrust Law, Dennis D. Crouch

Faculty Publications

I have very much enjoyed reading Professor Michael Carrier's important new book on the intersection of law and innovation, and greatly appreciate his contributions to the field. In this short essay, I will focus my discussion on my sole area of expertise—patent law. Carrier takes-on the subject of patents in Part III of his book. I agree with most of what Carrier writes. To make this essay more interesting, I focus on some of our areas of apparent disagreement.

A Decision-Theoretic Rule Of Reason For Minimum Resale Price Maintenance, Thom Lambert

Faculty Publications

This article evaluates these approaches from the perspective of decision theory and, finding each lacking, proposes an alternative approach to structuring the rule of reason governing RPM. Part II sets forth the decision-theoretic perspective, which seeks to maximize the net benefits of liability rules by minimizing the sum of decision and error costs. Part III then evaluates, from the standpoint of decision theory, the proposed approaches to evaluating instances of RPM. Part IV proposes an alternative evaluative approach that is more consistent with decision theory’s insights.

Intellectual Property And Antitrust Limits On Contract: Comment, Matthew J. Holian, Neil Nguyen

Faculty Publications

In their chapter in Dynamic Competition and Public Policy (2001, Cambridge University Press), Burtis and Kobayashi never defined their model's discount rate, making replicating their simulation results difficult. Through our own simulations, we were able to verify their results when using a discount rate of 0.10. We also identified two new types of equilibria that the authors overlooked, doubling the number of distinct equilibria in the model.

Is Novelty Obsolete? Chronicling The Irrelevance Of The Invention Date In U.S. Patent Law, Dennis D. Crouch

Faculty Publications

This paper presents a normative study of patent applicant use of invention-date rights during ex parte prosecution.

Leveraged Liquidity: Bear Raids And Junk Loans In The New Credit Market, Jose M. Gabilondo

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Dr. Miles Is Dead. Now What?: Structuring A Rule Of Reason For Minimum Resale Price Maintenance, Thom Lambert

Faculty Publications

This article critiques six approaches that have been proposed for evaluating minimum RPM and offers an alternative approach. The six approaches critiqued are (1) the Brandeisian, unstructured rule of reason; (2) Judge Posner's rule of per se legality; (3) the approach advocated by 27 states in the recent Nine West case; (4) the approach adopted by the Federal Trade Commission in that case; (5) the approach advocated by economists William Comanor and F.M. Scherer; and (6) the approach proposed in the Areeda & Hovenkamp Antitrust Law treatise. Finding each of these approaches deficient, the article proposes an alternative evaluative approach …

Detrebling Antitrust Damages In Monopolization Cases, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

This article examines the question of whether the statutory rule of mandatory treble damages should continue to apply in monopolization cases brought under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. The law of monopolization "has been a source of puzzlement to lawyers, judges and scholars." Compared to Section 1 of the Sherman Act, which has generated a plethora of case law and an emerging consensus on liability rules and remedies, the law of monopolization remains largely undeveloped with respect to both liability rules and remedies. In the remedies arena, the conversation has focused principally on equitable relief—conduct remedies versus structural …

Antitrust Language Barriers: First Amendment Constraints On Defining An Antitrust Market By A Broadcast's Language, And Its Implications For Audiences, Competition, And Democracy, Catherine J. K. Sandoval

Faculty Publications

This Article contends that the decision to define an antitrust market by the broadcast's language raises concerns about its constitutionality and its effect on competition and democracy. If inaccurate, the market definition may not only distort competition, it may limit the broadcaster's freedom of speech and the public's ability to hear that programming. The First Amendment protects speakers and those who wish to hear that speaker's message.

Using First Amendment jurisprudence, Section II of this Article analyzes the standard of review for evaluating a market definition based on a broadcast's language.

This Article uses social science research on Spanish- and …

Four Lessons From The Whole Foods Case, Thom Lambert

Faculty Publications

One of the most maligned antitrust decisions in history involved a merger of grocery store chains. Indeed, even those voices inclined toward substantial antitrust intervention believe the U.S. Supreme Court erred in its 1966 Von's Grocery decision, which condemned the merger of the third- and sixth-largest grocery store chains in Los Angeles. For example, the president of the reliably interventionist American Antitrust Institute conceded that the Supreme Court "probably went too far" and acknowledged that "if Von's Grocery had remained the rule, all of our industries would be highly fragmented and consumers would have lost out on many cost-cutting efficiencies." …

Cuban Claims: Embargoed Identities And The Cuban-American Oedipal Conflict (El Grito De La Yuma), Jose M. Gabilondo

Faculty Publications

No abstract provided.

Antitrust (Over-?) Confidence, Thom Lambert, Joshua D. Wright

Faculty Publications

On October 5, 2007, a group of antitrust scholars convened on Chicago's Near North Side to discuss monopolization law. In the course of their freewheeling but fascinating conversation, a number of broad themes emerged. Those themes can best be understood in contrast to a body of antitrust scholarship that was born six miles to the south, at the University of Chicago. Most notably, the North Side discussants demonstrate a hearty confidence in the antitrust enterprise - a confidence that is not shared by Chicago School scholars, who generally advocate a more modest antitrust. As scholars who are more sympathetic to …

Twombly: The Demise Of Notice Pleading, The Triumph Of Milton Handler, And The Uncertain Future Of Private Antitrust Enforcement, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

In a 7-2 decision, the Supreme Court in Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly reversed the Second Circuit and held that a complaint that alleged mere parallel behavior among rival telecommunications companies, coupled with stray statements of agreement that amounted to legal conclusions, failed as a matter of law to state a claim for an antitrust conspiracy in violation of the Sherman Act. The Court ruled that in order to withstand a motion to dismiss, an antitrust conspiracy complaint must plead such factual material that, if taken as true, would suggest that the defendants have entered into an unlawful agreement. …

Trinko: A Kinder, Gentler Approach To Dominant Firms Under The Antitrust Laws?, Edward D. Cavanagh

Faculty Publications

(Excerpt)

Section 2 of the Sherman Act prohibits monopolization, attempted monopolization and conspiracy to monopolize. The § 2 prohibitions are rooted in concerns "that possession of unchallenged economic power deadens initiative, discourages thrift and depresses energy; that immunity from competition is a narcotic, and rivalry is a stimulant, to industrial progress; that the spur of constant stress is necessary to counteract an inevitable disposition to let well enough alone." At the same time, courts have recognized that size alone cannot be the basis of condemnation under § 2, for as Learned Hand observed in Alcoa, "[t]he successful competitor, having …

Overvalued Equity And The Case For An Asymmetric Insider Trading Regime, Thom Lambert

Faculty Publications

This article argues for an asymmetric insider trading policy under which insider trading that decreases the price of an overvalued stock is generally permitted, but insider trading that increases the price of an undervalued stock is generally prohibited. Concluding that the net investor benefits of price-decreasing insider trading exceed those of price-enhancing insider trading, the article argues that an asymmetric insider trading regime likely represents the bargain that shareholders and corporate managers would strike if they were legally and practically able to negotiate an insider trading policy. Current insider trading doctrine would permit regulators to impose such an asymmetric insider …