Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing Latest Publications
TOTM The reaction to the CFI’s Microsoft decision (press release here) thus far has been largely negative. Read the full piece here.
The reaction to the CFI’s Microsoft decision (press release here) thus far has been largely negative.
Read the full piece here.
TOTM Within the last few days, the nation’s two most prominent newspapers have reported an interesting trend: businesses are seeking more government regulation. On Sunday, the . . .
Within the last few days, the nation’s two most prominent newspapers have reported an interesting trend: businesses are seeking more government regulation. On Sunday, the New York Times ran an article entitled In Turnaround, Industries Seek U.S. Regulation. Yesterday’s Wall Street Journal featured Food Makers Get Appetite for Regulation.
TOTM Danny Sokol pre-blogs Monday’s expected EU Microsoft decision. His punchline: this decision has the potential to cause substantial Trans-Atlantic discord and magnify the divergence between . . .
Danny Sokol pre-blogs Monday’s expected EU Microsoft decision. His punchline: this decision has the potential to cause substantial Trans-Atlantic discord and magnify the divergence between EU and US approaches to unilateral firm conduct, with important implications for the role of the ICN in facilitating convergence and harmonization across jurisdictions.
TOTM An assistant coach takes a substance banned by the NFL to treat diabetes. He is fined one third of his salary and suspended for 5 . . .
An assistant coach takes a substance banned by the NFL to treat diabetes. He is fined one third of his salary and suspended for 5 games. An NFL head coach violates an NFL rule concerning videotaping the opposition during a game from the sideline for fear that such conduct might impact the outcome of the game (though it did not in the case at issue so far as we know). Coach Belichick’s punishment: $500,000 and no suspension.
TOTM Danny Sokol points to Professor Einer Elhauge’s (Harvard) forthcoming paper in Competition Policy International where he argues that recent Supreme Court antitrust jurisprudence reflects a . . .
Danny Sokol points to Professor Einer Elhauge’s (Harvard) forthcoming paper in Competition Policy International where he argues that recent Supreme Court antitrust jurisprudence reflects a choice in favor of the Harvard School rather than the Chicago School of antitrust analysis. I recommend Professor Elhauge’s analysis to our readers for at least two reasons.
TOTM A pair of interesting antitrust appellate decisions have been released over the past few days involving single firm conduct and Section 2: Cascade Health Solutions . . .
A pair of interesting antitrust appellate decisions have been released over the past few days involving single firm conduct and Section 2: Cascade Health Solutions v. PeaceHealth (9th Cir.) and Broadcom v. Qualcomm (3rd Cir.).
TOTM Larry Ribstein offers a great post on the vision of law school specialization offered by Henry Manne which aimed to produce diversity between rather than . . .
Larry Ribstein offers a great post on the vision of law school specialization offered by Henry Manne which aimed to produce diversity between rather than within the law school. Larry discusses a recent potential example of this form of diversity at UC Irvine which has communicated an apparent interest specialization in the form of a commitment to produce “public interest lawyers.” For those interested, Larry has riffed on this theme previously. Institutional specialization at the law school level is also a subject that I’ve blogged about before in the context of a specialization in law and economics, see, e.g. here. In the context of this broader framework, UC Irvine’s reported interest in such specialization raises all sorts of interesting questions about the relative costs and benefits of the approach.
TOTM Here’s a taste of the reaction of former FTC Bureau of Economics Director Luke Froeb to some of the economic analysis in the recent Whole . . .
Here’s a taste of the reaction of former FTC Bureau of Economics Director Luke Froeb to some of the economic analysis in the recent Whole Foods merger case…
TOTM WSJ has a fascinating story this morning about a group of restaurants in Utah, Washington, Colorado and other places adopting a completely voluntary pricing system. . . .
WSJ has a fascinating story this morning about a group of restaurants in Utah, Washington, Colorado and other places adopting a completely voluntary pricing system. No registers. No prices. No “suggested” prices and no tips. The business model is essentially to provide food and allow customers to put whatever they want in a lock box at the front of the store. This is similar to the former economist turned Bagel Man in Freakonomics who delivered bagels to DC area offices on a quasi-honor system.
