UNITED STATES ANTITRUST LAW AND ECONOMICS
|
|
- Hillary Turner
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 UNITED STATES ANTITRUST LAW AND ECONOMICS by ElNER ELHAUGE Petrie Professor of Law, Harvard University FOUNDATION PRESS ^ANNIVERSARY] THOMSON "WEST
2 TABLE OF CASES xiii CHAPTER 1 Introduction 1 A. The Framework of Legal Issues Raised by Basic Antitrust Economics 1 B. An Overview of U.S. Antitrust Laws and Remedial Structure 10 CHAPTER 2 Which Horizontal Agreements Are Illegal? 48 A. Relevant U.S. Laws and General Legal Standards 48 Sherman Act 1, 15 U.S.C Sherman Act 2, 15 U.S.C Federal Trade Commission Act 5, 15 U.S.C B. Horizontal Price-Fixing 52 United States v. Trenton Potteries Questions on Trenton Potteries 54 Broadcast Music, Inc. (BMI) v. Columbia Broadcasting System 55 Questions on BMI 63 Arizona v. Maricopa County Medical Soc'y 65 Questions on Maricopa 72 Texaco Inc. v. Dagher - 74 Questions on Texaco v. Dagher 76 C. Horizontal Output Restrictions 77 NCAA v. Board of Regents of Univ. of Oklahoma 77 Questions on NCAA 85 D. Horizontal Market Divisions- 86 Palmer v. BRG 87 Questions on Palmer v. BRG - 88 U.S. DOJ/PTC, Antitrust Guidelines for Collaborations Among Competitors 91 Questions on FTC-DOJ Guidelines 93 E. Horizontal Agreements Not to Deal with Particular Firms Boycotts by Unrelated Rivals 95 Klor's Inc. v. Broadway-Hale Stores, Inc 95 Questions on Klor's 97 Fashion Originators' Guild of Am. u. FTC 97 Questions on Fashion Originators' Exclusions or Expulsions from a Productive Collaboration of Rivals 101 United States v. Terminal Railroad Ass'n 101 Associated Press v. United States 105 Questions on Terminal RR and Associated Press 107 Northwest Wholesale Stationers v. Pacific Stationery 109 Questions on Northwest Stationers - 113
3 VI F. Are Social Welfare Justifications Admissible? 114 National Society of Professional Engineers v. United States 115 Questions on Professional Engineers 120 FTC v. Indiana Federation of Dentists 122 Questions on Indiana Dentists 126 FTC v. Superior Court Trial Lawyers Ass'n 127 Questions on Trial Lawyer's Ass'n 131 California Dental Ass'n v. FTC 132 Questions on California Dental 140 Note on Burdens and Orders of Theory and Proof after California Dental 141 Note on the Policy Relevance of Nonprofit Status 142 Note on the Legal Treatment of Nonprofits Under U.S. Antitrust Law United States v. Brown University 144 Questions on United States v. Brown 151 G. Does Intellectual Property Law Justify an Anticompetitive Restraint? 153 United States v. General Electric Questions on General Electric 156 United States v. New Wrinkle, Inc 158 Questions on New Wrinkle 160 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Antitrust Guidelines for the Licensing of Intellectual Property (1995) Questions on the U.S. Guidelines 169 H. Buyer Cartels Mandeville Island Farms v. American Crystal Sugar 169 Questions on Mandeville Note on Countervailing Power and the Problem of the Second Best CHAPTER 3 What Unilateral Conduct Is Illegal? A. Relevant Laws & Basic Legal Elements 178 Sherman Act 2, 15 U.S.C Federal Trade Commission Act 5, 15 U.S.C Robinson-Patman Act, 15 U.S.C. 13(a) 180 B. The Power Element Economic and Legal Tests of Market Power Generally Legal Tests of Monopoly Power or a Dominant Position Market Definition 192 United States v. du Pont & Co. (The Cellophane Case) 193 Questions on du Pont (The Cellophane Case) U.S. DOJ/FTC, Horizontal Merger Guidelines Notes and Questions on the U.S. Market Definition Guidelines 207 Note on Technical Methods Used in Market Definition Aftermarkets Eastman Kodak v. Image Technical Servs 216 Questions on Kodak 224 C. Second Element: Anticompetitive Conduct General Standards Predatory Pricing 228 a. Below-Cost Predatory Pricing 228 Brooke Group Ltd. (Liggett) v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco Corp 228
4 vil Note and Questions About Brooke Note on U.S. Conflict on the Proper Cost Measure Elhauge, Why Above-Cost Price Cuts to Drive Out Entrants Do Not Signal Predation or Even Market Power and the Implications for Defining Costs 241 b. Above-Cost Predatory Pricing Enforcement Policy Regarding Unfair Exclusionary Conduct in the Air Transportation Industry Note and Questions on the Proposed U.S. Department of Transportation Enforced Policy -~- ~- 246 United States v. AMR Corp 247 Questions on American Airlines Note on Price Discrimination - ~~ Exclusions from Owned Property-Unilateral Refusals to Deal Otter Tail Power Company v. United States Questions on Otter Tail Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. 263 Questions on Aspen Skiing ~~ 270 Eastman Kodak v. Image Technical Servs. 273 Questions on the Kodak Duty to Deal With Rivals Verizon Commun. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko. 276 Questions on Verizon v. Trinko Einer Elhauge, Defining Better Monopolization Standards 283 Note on the U.S. Essential Facilities Doctrine 284 Note on Application of U.S. Antitrust Duties to Deal to Intellectual Property Price Squeezes and Predatory Overpaying. 287 Town of Concord v. Boston Edison Co 288 Questions on Town of Concord 296 Weyerhaeuser Co. v. Ross-Simmons Hardwood Lumber 297 Note and Questions on Weyerhaeuser 301 D. Causal Connection Between First and Second Elements Required? 302 Einer Elhauge, Defining Better Monopolization Standards 302 Note on Monopoly Leveraging E. Attempted Monopolization. 304 Lorain Journal v. United States 304 Questions on Lorain Journal 306 United States v. American Airlines 306 Questions on American Airlines Attempted Cartel Case 309 Spectrum Sports v. McQuillan 309 Note and Questions on Spectrum Sports 312 CHAPTER 4 Vertical Agreements That Restrict Dealing With Rivals A. Introduction Clayton Act 3, 15 U.S.C B. Exclusive Dealing United States v. Griffith Note on Griffith and Lorain Journal 324 Standard Fashion v. Magrane-Houston Questions on Standard Fashion Standard Oil and Standard Stations v. United States 326 Questions on Standard Stations
5 viii FTC v. Motion Picture Advertising Service 333 Note on Cumulative Foreclosure 335 Tampa Electric v. Nashville Coal 337 Note and Questions on Tampa Electric 341 United States v. Microsoft 342 Note on the U.S. Lower Court Splits on Foreclosure Thresholds and Terminability Relevance 348 Questions on Microsoft's Exclusive Dealing Holdings 349 C. Tying 350 United Shoe Machinery v. United States 361 Questions on United Shoe Tying Case 363 International Salt v. United States 363 Questions on International Salt 365 Times-Picayune Publishing v. United States 366 Questions on Times-Picayune 371 Jefferson Parish Hospital v. Hyde 373 Questions on Jefferson Parish 383 Eastman Kodak v. Image Technical Servs 386 Questions on Kodak 392 Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc 393 Questions on Illinois Tool Works 397 United States v. Microsoft 398 Questions on U.S. Microsoft Case Holdings on Tying 405 D. Loyalty and Bundled Discounts 406 United States v. Loew's Inc 416 Questions on Loew's 418 FTC v. Brown Shoe 419 Questions on FTC v. Brown Shoe 421 Concord Boat v. Brunswick Corp. 421 Questions on Concord Boat 424 LePage's Inc. v. 3M 425 Questions on LePage's 431 Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth 432 Questions on Cascade Health 438 Note on the U.S. Lower Court Splits on Loyalty and Bundled Discounts 439 CHAPTER 5 Agreements and Conduct That Arguably Distort Downstream Competition in Distributing a Supplier's Products 441 A. Introduction 441 B. Intrabrand Distributional Restraints on Resale Vertical Nonprice Restraints on Distribution 445 Continental T.V. v. GTE Sylvania 446 Questions on Sylvania Vertical Maximum Price-Fixing 453 State Oil Co. v. Khan 455 Questions on State Oil v. Khan Vertical Agreements Fixing Minimum Resale Prices 460 Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS, Inc Notes and Questions on Leegin 479
6 IX 4. How to Characterize Agreements 482 a. Are Dual Distribution Agreements Vertical or Horizontal? b. Vertical Agreements to "Boycott" the Rival of a Dealer Without Any Procompetitive Justification 484 NYNEXv. Discon. 484 Questions on NYNEX v. Discon 487 C. Price Discrimination that Arguably Distorts Downstream Competition 487 Robinson-Patman Act 2, 15 U.S.C FTC v. Morton Salt Co 489 Questions on Morton Salt 493 Texaco v. Hasbrouck 494 Questions on Texaco v. Hasbrouck 499 Volvo Trucks N.A. v. Reeder-Simco GMC 500 Questions on Volvo 504 Note on Other Robinson-Patman Act Provisions 506 CHAPTER 6 Proving An Agreement or Concerted Action 507 A. Are the Defendants Separate Entities? 507 Copperweld Corp. v. Independence Tube Corp 507 Questions on Copperweld Note on Agency Relations B. Standards for Finding a Vertical Agreement Monsanto Co. v. Spray-Rite Service Corp Questions on Monsanto C. Standards for Finding a Horizontal Agreement or Concerted Action Parallel Conduct Equally Consistent With an Independent Motive Theatre Enterprises v. Paramount Film Distributing 521 Questions on Theatre Enterprises Matsushita Electric v. Zenith Radio 523 Questions on Matsushita 528 Cement Manufacturers Protective Ass'n v. U.S 529 Questions on Cement Manufacturers Parallel Conduct that Would Be Unprofitable if Not Engaged in by Other Firms 531 a. When Parallel Conduct is Implausible Without an Explicit Agreement 531 Eastern States Retail Lumber Dealers' Ass 'n v. U.S 531 Questions on Eastern States Lumber 533 American Column & Lumber v. United States 533 Questions on American Column 538 American Tobacco v. United States Questions on American Tobacco b. When Parallel Conduct Follows Common Invitations or Secret Meetings 541 Interstate Circuit v. United States 541 Questions on Interstate Circuit 545 c. When Parallel Conduct Can Be Explained by Oligopolistic Price Interdependence
7 3. Agreements or Practices that Facilitate Oligopolistic Price Coordination 548 Maple Flooring Manufacturers Assn. v. United States Questions on Maple Flooring 554 United States v. Container Corp 555 Questions on Container 559 United States v. United States Gypsum 561 Questions on Gypsum 564 FTC v. Cement Institute 565 Questions on Cement Institute CHAPTER 7 Mergers 571 Clayton Act 7, 15 U.S.C A. Horizontal Mergers Unilateral Effects 577 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Horizontal Merger Guidelines 577 Questions on the U.S. Guidelines on Unilateral Effects 583 FTC v. Staples, Inc 583 Questions on Staples 590 Note on U.S. Agency Enforcement Activity 590 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines 591 Questions on U.S. Merger Commentary Oligopolistic Effects & Collective Dominance 602 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Horizontal Merger Guidelines 602 Questions on U.S. Guidelines on Coordinated Effects 605 Note on Qualitative v. Empirical Assessments 606 FTC v. H.J. Heinz Co 606 Questions on FTC v. Heinz 611 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines 613 Questions on U.S. Merger Commentary on Coordinated Effects 619 Note on Proving that a Merger Would Worsen Oligopolistic Coordination Entry Barriers 620 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Horizontal Merger Guidelines 620 Questions on Entry Barriers 624 FTCv. Staples, Inc. 624 Questions on Staples 626 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines 626 Questions on U.S. Merger Commentary on Entry Barriers Efficiencies & Weighing the Equities 634 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Horizontal Merger Guidelines Questions on U.S. Guidelines 635 Merger Efficiencies and Total v. Consumer Welfare 636 Note and Questions on Consumer Welfare v. Total Welfare 637 Consumer Trusts and Other Coasian Solutions to the Total v. Consumer Welfare Debate 638 FTC v. Staples, Inc 639 Note and Questions on Staples 642 FTC v. H.J. Heinz Co 642 Questions on FTC v. Heinz Note on How to Balance the Equities in Merger Cases-- 649
8 xi U.S. DOJ/FTC, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines Questions on U.S. Merger Commentary on Efficiencies The Failing Firm Defense 656 International Shoe v. FTC 656 Note and Questions on International Shoe v. FTC 659 Citizen Publishing v. United States 659 Note and Questions on Citizen's Publishing U.S. DOJ/FTC, Horizontal Merger Guidelines Note and Questions on Merger Guidelines on the Failing Firm Defense The Relevance of Buyer Power, Sophistication, or Views 663 a. Mergers Between Buyers that Create Buyer Power 663 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Horizontal Merger Guidelines U.S. DOJ/FTC, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines 665 b. Should Mergers Between Sellers Be Deemed Constrained By Buyer Power? 666 U.S. DOJ/FTC, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines 666 Questions on Whether Buyer Power Should Alter Assessments of Mergers That Otherwise Create Seller Market Power United States v. Baker Hughes, Inc 666 Note and Questions on Baker Hughes 668 c. Should Buyer Views Alter Assessments of Mergers Between Sellers? U.S. DOJ/FTC, Commentary on the Horizontal Merger Guidelines 669 Note on Buyer Noncomplaints 669 B. Vertical Mergers U.S. DOJ, 1984 Merger Guidelines Note and Questions on U.S. Vertical Merger Guidelines In the Matter of Cadence Design Systems, Inc 678 Questions on Cadence C. Conglomerate Mergers 687 U.S. DOJ, 1984 Merger Guidelines Note and Questions on U.S. Guidelines on Mergers Affecting Potential Competition 691 United States v. Marine Bancorporation 693 Note and Questions on Marine Bancorp 699 INDEX 701
ANTITRUST LAW AND ECONOMICS ADJUNCT PROFESSOR PAUL BARTLETT, JR LA TROBE UNIVERSITY, Melbourne, Australia
To: Students, Antitrust Law And Economics Greetings and welcome to the class. Regarding the class syllabus, the cases which are in bold print are for student class recitation. In view of time constraints,
More informationANTITRUST LAW, POLICY AND PROCEDURE
ANTITRUST LAW, POLICY AND PROCEDURE Cases, Materials, Problems Sixth Edition E. Thomas Sullivan Senior Vice President and Provost & Julius E. Davis Chair in Law University of Minnesota 'Law School Herbert
More informationANTITRUST LAW, POLICY, AND PROCEDURE. Cases, Materials, Problems. Seventh Edition
ANTITRUST LAW, POLICY, AND PROCEDURE Cases, Materials, Problems Seventh Edition. Thomas Sullivan President ofthe University of Vermont and Dean Emeritus, University of Minnesota Law School Herbert Hovenkamp
More informationAntitrust Syllabus (construction in progress)
Last updated: April 11, 2013 Antitrust Syllabus (construction in progress) Page references are to the casebook, Rogers, Calkins, Patterson & Andersen, Antitrust Law: Policy and Practice (4th ed. 2007).
More informationAntitrust Injury in Robinson-Patman Cases: What s Left?
NOVEMBER 2008, RELEASE TWO Antitrust Injury in Robinson-Patman Cases: What s Left? Scott Martin Weil, Gotshal & Manges LLP Antitrust Injury in Robinson-Patman Cases: What s Left? Scott Martin* lthough
More informationA Different Approach to Antimonopolization Enforcement for the Obama Admininstration
A Different Approach to Antimonopolization Enforcement for the Obama Admininstration Andrew J. Pincus May 2009 President Barack Obama promised during the 2008 presidential campaign that he would reinvigorate
More informationFacts That Shed Light on Intent of Single-Firm Refusals to Deal: Comparative Review of the United States and the Republic of Korea Jurisprudence
Facts That Shed Light on Intent of Single-Firm Refusals to Deal: Comparative Review of the United States and the Republic of Korea Jurisprudence Sale Kwon * I. INTRODUCTION... 84 II. IMPORTANCE OF INTENT
More informationTHE COMMON LAW OF SECTION 2: IS IT STILL ALIVE AND WELL?
2008] 1163 THE COMMON LAW OF SECTION 2: IS IT STILL ALIVE AND WELL? J. Thomas Rosch * The Supreme Court has given the antitrust community much to chew on with nine decisions in the last four years. These
More informationCopyright 2014 Carolina Academic Press, LLC. All rights reserved. ANTITRUST LAW, POLICY, AND PROCEDURE: CASES, MATERIALS, PROBLEMS SEVENTH EDITION
ANTITRUST LAW, POLICY, AND PROCEDURE: CASES, MATERIALS, PROBLEMS SEVENTH EDITION LexisNexis Law School Publishing Advisory Board Paul Caron Professor of Law Pepperdine University School of Law Herzog Summer
More informationPatents, Tying and Market Power: The Implications of ITW v. Independent Ink for Antitrust Claims Against IP Owners
Patents, Tying and Market Power: The Implications of ITW v. Independent Ink for Antitrust Claims Against IP Owners Andrew J. Pincus Christopher J. Kelly March 14, 2006 Summary of Seminar The case, the
More informationTowards a Consistent Antitrust Policy for Unilateral Conduct
theantitrustsource w w w. a n t i t r u s t s o u r c e. c o m F e b r u a r y 2 0 0 9 1 The Antitrust Source, February 2009. 2009 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights
More informationAnglo-American Law. Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. V. Psks, Inc., Dba Kay s Kloset, Kay s Shoes. Aykut ÖZDEMİR* * Attorney at law.
Anglo-American Law Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. V. Psks, Inc., Dba Kay s Kloset, Kay s Shoes Aykut ÖZDEMİR* * Attorney at law. Introduction Mainly, agreements restricting competition are grouped
More informationThe typical lawyer in Colorado does not make his or her living
Reproduced by permission. 2014 Colorado Bar Association 43 The Colorado Lawyer 19 (October 2014). All rights reserved. ANTITRUST AND CONSUMER PROTECTION LAW Antitrust for All: A Primer for the Non-Antitrust
More informationGraduate Industrial Organization Some Notes on Antitrust.
Graduate Industrial Organization Some Notes on Antitrust. John Asker October 17, 2011 The purpose of these notes is not to give an introduction to the law of antitrust in any comprehensive way. Instead,
More informationSyllabus -- Franchise and Distribution Law/Professor Devlin/Fall 2008
Preliminary (subject to change) Syllabus -- Franchise and Distribution Law/Professor Devlin/Fall 2008 Meets Tuesday and Thursday 10:30 Noon Room TBD Casebook Schneider and Ney - Business Franchise Law:
More informationLEGAL UPDATE MICROSOFT: EXCLUSIVE DEALING UNDER SECTION 1 OF THE SHERMAN ACT: A NEW STANDARD? Shannon A. Keyes
LEGAL UPDATE MICROSOFT: EXCLUSIVE DEALING UNDER SECTION 1 OF THE SHERMAN ACT: A NEW STANDARD? Shannon A. Keyes I. INTRODUCTION The United States Supreme Court has denied the Justice Department s petition
More information12/6/ :35:59 AM
The Untwining of Patent Law and Antitrust: No Presumption of Market Power in Patent Tying Cases According to the Supreme Court in Illinois Tool Works v. Independent Ink Sue Ann Mota 1 I. INTRODUCTION Congress
More informationLecture Notes: Industrial Organization in Context (to be distributed).
Stephen Martin EC 361 Economics of Antitrust & Regulation Spring 2008 smartin@purdue.edu T & Th 9:00-10:15 494 4402 KRAN G012 Office hours: T, Th 10:30-11:30 and by appointment, 4027 Rawls. Course web
More information1 Manufacturer Manufacturer Manufacturer 2 Distributor Distributor Distributor Distributor Distributor Distributor 3 Consumers
American Concrete Pipe Association Professional Product Proficiency A Technical and Sales/Marketing Training Program ACPA Sales and Marketing Series Module I: Sales Basics 1 Course 1: Antitrust Author:
More informationLegal Methodology in Antitrust Law
Thema/Anlass Datum Seite 1 Legal Methodology in Antitrust Law 10,502,1.00 Comparative Legal Methods Prof. Dr. Peter Hettich, LL.M. Friday, November 16, 2007, 12:35 Agenda Substantive Law and Procedure
More informationAN T I T R U S T C H A L L E N G E S T O
Antitrust, Vol. 31, No. 1, Fall 2016. 2016 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in
More information10 TH ANNUAL HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER S ROUNDTABLE VBA HEALTH LAW SECTION
10 TH ANNUAL HEALTH CARE PRACTITIONER S ROUNDTABLE VBA HEALTH LAW SECTION ANTITRUST SCRUTINY OF HEALTH CARE TRANSACTIONS HEMAN A. MARSHALL, III Woods Rogers, PLC 540-983-7654 marshall@woodsrogers.com November
More informationWhat Should Be Next at the Supreme Court?
theantitrustsource www.antitrustsource.com December 2007 1 What Should Be Next at the Supreme Court? Jonathan M. Jacobson I In asking What s next at the Supreme Court, we can focus on what we think will
More informationState Regulation of Resale Price Maintenance on the Internet: The Constitutional Problems with the 2009 Amendment to the Maryland Antitrust Act
State Regulation of Resale Price Maintenance on the Internet: The Constitutional Problems with the 2009 Amendment to the Maryland Antitrust Act Katherine M. Brockmeyer * Table of Contents I. Introduction...
More informationA New Chapter in Antitrust Law: The Second Circuit's Decision in United States v. Apple Determines Hub-and-Spoke Conspiracy Per Se Illegal
Boston College Law Review Volume 57 Issue 6 Electronic Supplement Article 6 4-7-2016 A New Chapter in Antitrust Law: The Second Circuit's Decision in United States v. Apple Determines Hub-and-Spoke Conspiracy
More informationAntitrust and Intellectual Property
and Intellectual Property July 22, 2016 Rob Kidwell, Member Antitrust Prohibitions vs IP Protections The Challenge Harmonizing U.S. antitrust laws that sanction the illegal use of monopoly/market power
More informationAntitrust Considerations for Participants in the Commodity Markets. Presented by: Michael H. Knight Stephen J. Obie
Antitrust Considerations for Participants in the Commodity Markets Presented by: Michael H. Knight Stephen J. Obie Administrative Items The webinar will be recorded and posted to the FIA website following
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 15-565 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States APPLE INC., v. Petitioner, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Respondents. On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals
More informationWhither Price Squeeze Antitrust?
JANUARY 2008, RELEASE ONE Whither Price Squeeze Antitrust? Jonathan M. Jacobson and Valentina Rucker Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati Whither Price Squeeze Antitrust? Jonathan M. Jacobson and Valentina
More informationThe Abiding Influence of The Antitrust Paradox: An Essay in Honor of Robert H. Bork
Yale Law School Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship Series Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship 1-1-2008 The Abiding Influence of The Antitrust Paradox: An Essay in Honor of
More informationIntroduction into US business law VIII FS 2017
Introduction into US business law VIII FS 2017 Repetition last time: torts > Torts > Civil wrong > Relevance (incl. Excessive damages reforms?) > Intentional > Negligence > To proof: > Duty to care, breach
More informationUnited States Court of Appeals
In the United States Court of Appeals For the Seventh Circuit No. 15-3001 WOODMAN S FOOD MARKET, INC., v. Plaintiff-Appellee, CLOROX COMPANY AND CLOROX SALES COMPANY, Defendants-Appellants. Appeal from
More informationWikiLeaks Document Release
WikiLeaks Document Release February 2, 2009 Congressional Research Service Report RS22700 Resale Price Maintenance No Longer a Per Se Antitrust Offense: Leegin Creative Leather Products v. PSKS, Inc. Janice
More informationWorking Party No. 3 on Co-operation and Enforcement
Unclassified DAF/COMP/WP3/WD(2016)10 DAF/COMP/WP3/WD(2016)10 Unclassified Organisation de Coopération et de Développement Économiques Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 02-Jun-2016
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MASSACHUSETTS ) NEW ENGLAND CARPENTERS HEALTH ) BENEFITS FUND, et al., ) Plaintiffs, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 07-12277-PBS ) ) McKESSON CORPORATION, ) Defendant.
More informationSTATEMENT OF CHARLES P. BAKER CHAIR ABA SECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW. on behalf of the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION. before the SUBCOMMITTEE
STATEMENT OF CHARLES P. BAKER CHAIR ABA SECTION OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY LAW on behalf of the AMERICAN BAR ASSOCIATION before the SUBCOMMITTEE on COURTS, THE INTERNET, AND INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY COMMITTEE
More information2(f) --Creates liability for the knowing recipient of a discriminatory price.
ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT I. INTRODUCTION The Robinson-Patman Act was enacted in 1936 to solidify and enhance the Clayton Act's attack on discriminatory pricing. The Act was designed to address specific types
More informationIn The Supreme Court of the United States
No. 06-480 ================================================================ In The Supreme Court of the United States LEEGIN CREATIVE LEATHER PRODUCTS, INC., v. Petitioner, PSKS, INC., doing business as
More informationSUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES
Cite as: 555 U. S. (2009) 1 NOTICE: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the preliminary print of the United States Reports. Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of
More informationNational Collegiate Athletic Association v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma and University of Georgia Athletic Association
Chicago-Kent Law Review Volume 61 Issue 3 Article 5 June 1985 National Collegiate Athletic Association v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma and University of Georgia Athletic Association Susan
More informationCANADIAN OIL AND GAS COMPANIES WHAT CANADIAN OIL AND GAS COMPANIES NEED TO KNOW ABOUT U.S. ANTITRUST LAWS THERESA J. ARNOLD.
CANADIAN OIL AND GAS COMPANIES 557 WHAT CANADIAN OIL AND GAS COMPANIES NEED TO KNOW ABOUT U.S. ANTITRUST LAWS THERESA J. ARNOLD. The author presents an introduction to and a cautionary warning about the
More informationAntitrust Law and Proof of Consumer Injury
St. John's Law Review Volume 75 Issue 4 Volume 75, Fall 2001, Number 4 Article 4 March 2012 Antitrust Law and Proof of Consumer Injury Robert D. Joffe Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.law.stjohns.edu/lawreview
More informationMarch 13, This comment is submitted in response to the United States Department of
THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE ANTITRUST DIVISION PUBLIC ROUNDTABLE SERIES ON COMPETITION AND DEREGULATION, FIRST ROUNDTABLE ON STATE ACTION, STATUTORY EXEMPTIONS AND IMPLIED IMMUNITIES, COMMENT
More informationANTITRUST DECISIONS OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, 1967 TO 2007
ANTITRUST DECISIONS OF THE U.S. SUPREME COURT, 1967 TO 2007 Leah Brannon Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP Douglas H. Ginsburg George Mason University School of Law Competition Policy International,
More informationDoes Antitrust Have a Comparative Advantage?
University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Journal Articles Faculty Scholarship 1999 Does Antitrust Have a Comparative Advantage? Frank H. Easterbrook Follow this and additional works at: http://chicagounbound.uchicago.edu/journal_articles
More informationThe Antitrust Enterprise: Principle and Execution
University of Chicago Law School Chicago Unbound Coase-Sandor Working Paper Series in Law and Economics Coase-Sandor Institute for Law and Economics 2006 The Antitrust Enterprise: Principle and Execution
More informationAntitrust and Refusals To Deal after Nynex v. Discon
Antitrust and Refusals To Deal after Nynex v. Discon Donald M. Falk * Your client really can say "no" without running afoul of the antitrust limitations. NO ONE LIKES to lose business. On the other hand,
More informationINTERNATIONAL SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION ARRANGEMENTS: CURRENT TRENDS & ISSUES. By David B. Eberhardt and John E. McCann, Jr.
INTERNATIONAL SUPPLY AND DISTRIBUTION ARRANGEMENTS: CURRENT TRENDS & ISSUES By David B. Eberhardt and John E. McCann, Jr. In today s global economy, and with the advent of purchasing via the Internet,
More informationI. INTRODUCTION... 4 II. OVERVIEW OF THE ACT A. Codification... 4 B. Section C. Section D. Exemptions... 5 E. Enforcement...
I. INTRODUCTION... 4 II. OVERVIEW OF THE ACT... 4 A. Codification... 4 B. Section 2... 4 C. Section 3... 5 D. Exemptions... 5 E. Enforcement... 5 III. PRICE DISCRIMINATION UNDER THE ROBINSON-PATMAN ACT...
More informationIf Per Se Is Dying, Why Not in TV Tying? A Case for Adopting the Rule of Reason Standard in Television Block- Booking Arrangements
Fordham Intellectual Property, Media and Entertainment Law Journal Volume 12 Volume XII Number 1 Volume XII Book 1 Article 5 2002 If Per Se Is Dying, Why Not in TV Tying? A Case for Adopting the Rule of
More informationSOME PREDICTIONS ABOUT FUTURE ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT
2009] 895 SOME PREDICTIONS ABOUT FUTURE ANTITRUST ENFORCEMENT Robert Pitofsky * INTRODUCTION I have been given the challenge of discussing what antitrust enforcement is likely to be over the next four
More informationThe Rule of Reason After Leegin: Reconsidering the Use of Economic Analysis in the Antitrust Arena
The Rule of Reason After Leegin: Reconsidering the Use of Economic Analysis in the Antitrust Arena The rule of reason is designed and used to eliminate anti-competitive transactions from the market. This
More informationCongressional Digital Collection Supporting Research and Education. Area of Practice: Antitrust Law
LexisNexis Congressional Digital Collection Supporting Research and Education Area of Practice: Antitrust Law Use primary source congressional documents to: Understand legislative process Compile research
More informationUNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA. Plaintiffs,
Case :-cv-000-h-blm Document Filed 0/0/ Page of 0 0 0 DEBRA HOSLEY, et al., vs. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA Plaintiffs, NATIONAL PYGMY GOAT ASSOCIATION; and DOES TO 0,
More informationThe Grinnell Test of Monopolization Sounds a False Alarm: Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp.
Boston College Law Review Volume 28 Issue 2 Number 2 Article 7 3-1-1987 The Grinnell Test of Monopolization Sounds a False Alarm: Aspen Skiing Co. v. Aspen Highlands Skiing Corp. David M. Rievman Follow
More informationA (800) (800)
No. 15-565 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States APPLE, INC., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES, et al., Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND
More informationAntitrust IP Competition Perspectives
Antitrust IP Competition Perspectives Dr. Dina Kallay Counsel for IP and Int l Antitrust Federal Trade Commission The 6 th Annual Session of the UNECE Team of I.P. Specialists June 21, 2012 The views expressed
More informationChallenges of the New Economy: Issues at the Intersection of Antitrust and Intellectual Property
Georgetown University Law Center Scholarship @ GEORGETOWN LAW 2001 Challenges of the New Economy: Issues at the Intersection of Antitrust and Intellectual Property Robert Pitofsky Georgetown University
More informationNCAA v. Board of Regents: Supreme Court Intercepts Per Se Rule and Rule of Reason
University of Miami Law School Institutional Repository University of Miami Law Review 5-1-1985 NCAA v. Board of Regents: Supreme Court Intercepts Per Se Rule and Rule of Reason Peter W. Bellas Follow
More informationThe Critical Importance of Proving Market Impact in Sherman Act Antitrust Cases: A Review of the Second Circuit's Recent Antitust Decisions
Brooklyn Law Review Volume 65 Issue 2 The Second Circuit Review: 1998-99 Term Article 2 12-1-1999 The Critical Importance of Proving Market Impact in Sherman Act Antitrust Cases: A Review of the Second
More informationANTITRUST LAW: POLICY AND PRACTICE Fourth Edition
ANTITRUST LAW: POLICY AND PRACTICE Fourth Edition 2013 Supplement C. Paul Rogers III Professor of Law and Former Dean Dedman School of Law Southern Methodist University Stephen Calkins Professor of Law
More informationUnited States ELEANOR M. FOX AND ROBERT PITOFSKY. Goals of US Competition Policy. Economic and Noneconomic Goals
United States 7 ELEANOR M. FOX AND ROBERT PITOFSKY This chapter provides an overview of US antitrust law, with emphasis on those portions that affect international trade and global competition. In a few
More informationInternational Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire. Refusal to Deal
International Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire Agency Name: Swiss Competition Authority Date: November 2009 Refusal to Deal This questionnaire seeks information on ICN
More informationCase 1:05-cv MRB Document 27 Filed 09/08/2006 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION
Case 1:05-cv-00519-MRB Document 27 Filed 09/08/2006 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION Total Benefits Planning Agency Inc. et al., Plaintiffs v. Case No.
More informationNo IN THE Supreme Court of the United States OHIO, ET AL., BRIEF FOR AMERICAN EXPRESS IN OPPOSITION
No. 16-1454 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States OHIO, ET AL., v. AMERICAN EXPRESS COMPANY, ET AL., Petitioners, Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More informationInvestigation No. 337-TA International Trade Commission
Investigation No. 337-TA-1002 International Trade Commission In the Matter of CERTAIN CARBON AND STEEL ALLOY PRODUCTS Comments of the International Center of Law & Economics Regarding the Commission s
More informationInternational Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire
International Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire Agency Name: Commission for Promotion of Competition (COPROCOM), Costa Rica Date: 28-10-2009 Refusal to Deal This questionnaire
More informationClient Advisory. United States Antitrust Guidelines. Corporate Department. I. The U.S. Antitrust Laws. July 2013
Client Advisory Corporate Department United States Antitrust Guidelines The American economic system depends upon free enterprise and open competition. The U.S. antitrust laws were enacted to help preserve
More informationAntitrust Stare Decisis
theantitrustsource w w w. a n t i t r u s t s o u r c e. c o m O c t o b e r 2 0 1 5 1 Antitrust Stare Decisis Barak Orbach I In June 2015, the Supreme Court handed down several landmark decisions in controversial
More informationThe Scope of the Insurance Industry's Sherman Act Exemption: New Considerations
Boston College Law Review Volume 19 Issue 2 Number 2 Article 3 1-1-1978 The Scope of the Insurance Industry's Sherman Act Exemption: New Considerations Leonard M. Singer Follow this and additional works
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 08-661 In the Supreme Court of the United States AMERICAN NEEDLE, INC., Petitioner, V. NATIONAL FOOTBALL LEAGUE, et al., Respondents. ON WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR
More informationThe No Economic Sense Test for Exclusionary Conduct. Gregory J. Werden *
The No Economic Sense Test for Exclusionary Conduct Gregory J. Werden * I. INTRODUCTION... 293 II. THE TRINKO CASE... 294 III. POLICIES UNDERLYING THE NO ECONOMIC SENSE TEST... 296 IV. THE NO ECONOMIC
More informationTHE TRANSFORMATION OF VERTICAL RESTRAINTS: PER SE ILLEGALITY, THE RULE OF REASON, AND PER SE LEGALITY
THE TRANSFORMATION OF VERTICAL RESTRAINTS: PER SE ILLEGALITY, THE RULE OF REASON, AND PER SE LEGALITY D. DANIEL SOKOL* Robert Bork probably had the single most lasting influence on antitrust law and policy
More informationCleveland State University. Anthony J. Lazzaro
Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Cleveland State Law Review Law Journals 2004 Monopoly Leveraging in Verizon Communications v. Law Offices of Curtis v. Trinko, LLP: Why the United States
More informationAmerican Needle, Inc. v. National Football League: Justice Stevens Last Twinkling of an Eye
Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Digital Commons at Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Law Reviews 3-1-2011 American Needle, Inc. v. National
More informationCase4:07-cv CW Document133 Filed01/12/10 Page1 of 18 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA
Case:0-cv-00-CW Document Filed0//0 Page of IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 0 0 FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA SAFEWAY INC.; WALGREEN CO.; THE KROGER CO.; NEW ALBERTSON S, INC.; AMERICAN SALES
More informationDevelopments in Section Two of the Sherman Act
Notre Dame Law School NDLScholarship Journal Articles Publications 1986 Developments in Section Two of the Sherman Act Joseph P. Bauer Notre Dame Law School, jbauer@nd.edu Follow this and additional works
More informationAntitrust/Intellectual Property Interface Under U.S. Law
BEIJING BRUSSELS CHICAGO DALLAS FRANKFURT GENEVA HONG KONG LONDON LOS ANGELES NEW YORK SAN FRANCISCO SHANGHAI SINGAPORE SYDNEY TOKYO WASHINGTON, D.C. Antitrust/Intellectual Property Interface Under U.S.
More informationSupreme Court of the United States
No. 15-565 IN THE Supreme Court of the United States APPLE INC., v. Petitioner, UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, et al., Respondents. ON PETITION FOR A WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
More information"JUSTICE" AND OTHER NON-ECONOMIC GOALS OF ANTITRUST Louis B. ScHwA-rz [
"JUSTICE" AND OTHER NON-ECONOMIC GOALS OF ANTITRUST Louis B. ScHwA-rz [ [Vol. 127:1076 (Comments on Pitofsky, The Political Content of Antitrust) Commissioner Pitofsky's admirable delineation and defense
More informationProtest Boycotts as Restraints of Trade under the Sherman Act: A Proposed Standard
Cleveland State University EngagedScholarship@CSU Cleveland State Law Review Law Journals 1981 Protest Boycotts as Restraints of Trade under the Sherman Act: A Proposed Standard Francis M. Allegra Follow
More informationInternational Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire
International Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire Agency Name: Commission for the Supervision of Business Competition Date: October 2009 Refusal to Deal This questionnaire
More informationGCR THE HANDBOOK OF COMPETITION ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES. A Global Competition Review special report published in association with: NOTES.
NOTES THE HANDBOOK OF COMPETITION ENFORCEMENT AGENCIES 2015 A Global Competition Review special report published in association with: GCR GLOBAL COMPETITION REVIEW www.globalcompetitionreview.com www.globalcompetitionreview.com
More informationSupreme C~rt. U.S. FILED ~OCT l~2007 ~o. - OFFICE OF THE CLERK
Supreme C~rt. U.S. FILED 07-5 1 ~OCT l~2007 ~o. - OFFICE OF THE CLERK IN THE ~upreme q~ourt of the ~niteb ~tate~ PACIFIC BELL TELEPHONE COMPANY D/B/A AT&T CALIFORNIA, ET AL., Petitioners, V. LINKLINE COMMUNICATIONS,
More informationLessons ofauo: Application of the Per Se Rule Precluded Evaluation of the Reasons for, and Impact of Competitor Meetings
61ST ANNUAL ANTITRUST LAW SPRING MEETING April 10, 2013 3:45-5:15 pm Lessons From the AU0 Trial Lessons ofauo: Application of the Per Se Rule Precluded Evaluation of the Reasons for, and Impact of Competitor
More informationA Missed Opportunity: Nonprofit Antitrust Liability in Virginia Vermiculite, Ltd. v. Historic Green Springs, Inc.
Yale Law Journal Volume 113 Issue 2 Yale Law Journal Article 5 2003 A Missed Opportunity: Nonprofit Antitrust Liability in Virginia Vermiculite, Ltd. v. Historic Green Springs, Inc. Olivia S. Choe Follow
More informationWHAT EVERY IN-HOUSE LAWYER NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT ANTITRUST AND COMPETITION LAW
WHAT EVERY IN-HOUSE LAWYER NEEDS TO KNOW ABOUT ANTITRUST AND COMPETITION LAW William Jay Hunter, Jr., Steven B. Loy, Amy Olive Wheeler, Brad S. Keeton, and Rebecca Ann Krefft I. WHAT IS ANTITRUST? A. Antitrust
More informationToward a Coherent Antitrust Policy: The Role of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act in Price Discrimination Regulation
Boston College Law Review Volume 16 Issue 2 Number 2 Article 1 1-1-1975 Toward a Coherent Antitrust Policy: The Role of Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act in Price Discrimination Regulation
More informationSummary of Discussion Points. Presented by the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) to the OECD Competition Committee Working Party No. 3.
The Voice of OECD Business Summary of Discussion Points Presented by the Business and Industry Advisory Committee (BIAC) to the OECD Competition Committee Working Party No. 3. Roundtable on Unilateral
More informationThe Fractured Unity of Antitrust Law and the Antitrust Jurisprudence of Justice
Yale Law School Yale Law School Legal Scholarship Repository Faculty Scholarship Series Yale Law School Faculty Scholarship 1-1-1996 The Fractured Unity of Antitrust Law and the Antitrust Jurisprudence
More informationNCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma: Has the Supreme Court Abrogated the Per Se Rule of Antitrust Analysis
Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Digital Commons at Loyola Marymount University and Loyola Law School Loyola of Los Angeles Law Review Law Reviews 12-1-1985 NCAA v. Board of Regents of
More informationInternational Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire
International Competition Network Unilateral Conduct Working Group Questionnaire Agency Name: Fiscalía Nacional Económica FNE (National Economic Prosecutor s Office) Date: vember 30 th, 2009 Refusal to
More informationCase 3:14-cv JM Document 78 Filed 04/16/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION
Case 3:14-cv-00143-JM Document 78 Filed 04/16/15 Page 1 of 12 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF ARKANSAS JONESBORO DIVISION TRI STATE ADVANCED SURGERY CENTER, LLC, GLENN A. CROSBY
More informationUNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
FOR PUBLICATION UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT ROB BRANTLEY, DARRYN COOKE, WILLIAM and BEVERLEY COSTLEY, PETER G. HARRIS, CHRISTIANA HILLS, MICHAEL B. KOVAC, MICHELLE NAVARRETTE,
More informationAntitrust and Intellectual Property: Recent Developments in the Pharmaceuticals Sector
September 2009 (Release 2) Antitrust and Intellectual Property: Recent Developments in the Pharmaceuticals Sector Aidan Synnott & William Michael Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison LLP www.competitionpolicyinternational.com
More informationA Survey of the Antitrust Law of Exclusive Agreements
University of Richmond Law Review Volume 6 Issue 2 Article 8 1972 A Survey of the Antitrust Law of Exclusive Agreements John H. Shenefield Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarship.richmond.edu/lawreview
More informationIN , A S A N T I T R U S T M A G A Z I N E
C O V E R S T O R I E S Antitrust, Vol. 27, No. 1, Fall 2012. 2012 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied
More informationPatent Portfolio Management and Technical Standard Setting: How to Avoid Loss of Patent Rights. Bruce D. Sunstein 1 Bromberg & Sunstein LLP
Patent Portfolio Management and Technical Standard Setting: How to Avoid Loss of Patent Rights I. The Antitrust Background by Bruce D. Sunstein 1 Bromberg & Sunstein LLP Standard setting can potentially
More information2007] THE SUPREME COURT LEADING CASES 425
2007] THE SUPREME COURT LEADING CASES 425 dent, this is the congressional design. 95 Reserving its most forceful language to criticize one factor on the EPA s laundry list of impermissible reasons not
More informationRUTGERS BUSINESS LAW JOURNAL. The Section 2 Debate: Should Lenity Play a Role? MARK S. POPOFSKY
RUTGERS BUSINESS LAW JOURNAL MARK S. POPOFSKY The Section 2 Debate: Should Lenity Play a Role? ABSTRACT. The Supreme Court s recent decision in Illinois Tool Works, by invoking the Rule of Lenity in construing
More information