Showing Latest Publications

TIM WU’S BAD HISTORY: BIG BUSINESS AND THE RISE OF FASCISM

Popular Media The recent increase in economic concentration and monopoly power make the United States “ripe for dictatorship,” claims Columbia law professor Tim Wu in his new book, The Curse of Bigness.

The recent increase in economic concentration and monopoly power make the United States “ripe for dictatorship,” claims Columbia law professor Tim Wu in his new book, The Curse of Bigness. With the release of Senator Elizabeth Warren’s proposal to “break up” technology companies like Amazon and Google, fear of bigness is clearly on the rise. Professor Wu’s book adds a new dimension to that fear, arguing that cooperation between political and economic power are “closely linked to the rise of fascism” because “the monopolist and the dictator tend to have overlapping interests.” Economist Hal Singer calls this the book’s “biggest innovation.”

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Geoffrey Manne participates in OECD Going Digital Summit

Presentations & Interviews ICLE President & Founder Geoffrey Manne participated in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s “Going Digital” summit in Paris, March 11-12. The summit served . . .

ICLE President & Founder Geoffrey Manne participated in the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development’s “Going Digital” summit in Paris, March 11-12. The summit served as the high-level closing event of the two-year Going Digital Project. The project’s main findings and policy messages were presented, including the final synthesis report, its companion publication on Measuring the Digital Transformation, and the Going Digital Toolkit, a new website that will grow to include indicators, evidence, experiences and innovative policy practices. Video of Geoff’s panel, “Competition in the Digital Age” is embedded below.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Calling into Question the FTC’s Theory of the Case in FTC v. Qualcomm

TOTM It is not uncommon—in fact it is expected—that parties to a negotiation would have different opinions about the reasonableness of any deal. Every buyer asks . . .

It is not uncommon—in fact it is expected—that parties to a negotiation would have different opinions about the reasonableness of any deal. Every buyer asks for a price as low as possible, and sellers naturally request prices at which buyers (feign to) balk. A recent movement among some lawyers and economists has been to label such disagreements in the context of standard-essential patents not as a natural part of bargaining, but as dispositive proof of “hold-up,” or the innovator’s purported abuse of newly gained market power to extort implementers. We have four primary issues with this hold-up fad.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Kristian Stout Debates Matt Stoller on the Bigness of Big Tech at Cato Institute Conference, “Who’s Afraid of Big Tech?” 03/01/19

Presentations & Interviews ICLE Associate Director, Kristian Stout joins Matt Stoller of Open Markets Institute on the panel titled "Is Big Tech Too Big?" at the Cato Institute conference, "Who’s Afraid of Big Tech?"

ICLE Associate Director, Kristian Stout joins Matt Stoller of Open Markets Institute on the panel titled “Is Big Tech Too Big?” at the Cato Institute conference, “Who’s Afraid of Big Tech?” The full video is embedded below.

 

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

ICLE Letter on The proposed T-Mobile/Sprint merger and the state of the relevant economic literature

Regulatory Comments We write to address a crucial question relevant to your upcoming, March 12 hearing on “The State of Competition in the Wireless Market: Examining the Impact of the Proposed Merger of T-Mobile and Sprint on Consumers, Workers, and the Internet.”

Introduction

The International Center for Law and Economics (ICLE) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan research center whose work promotes the use of law & economics methodologies to inform public policy debates. We believe that intellectually rigorous, data-driven analysis will lead to efficient policy solutions that promote consumer welfare and global economic growth.

We write to address a crucial question relevant to your upcoming, March 12 hearing on “The State of Competition in the Wireless Market: Examining the Impact of the Proposed Merger of T-Mobile and Sprint on Consumers, Workers, and the Internet”: the likely effects on consumer welfare that a “4-to-3” merger among the largest US mobile carriers would have. We are currently working on a comprehensive literature review of economic studies looking at such mergers in other developed countries. Although that review is not yet completed, this letter shares several notable preliminary conclusions for consideration by the Subcommittee.

Click here to read the full letter.

Continue reading
Telecommunications & Regulated Utilities

ICLE Comments, Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s Digital Platforms Inquiry

Regulatory Comments The analysis in the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s Preliminary Report for the Digital Platforms Inquiry is inadequate in several ways. There is a real danger that if the policy recommendations outlined in the preliminary report were to be adopted, Australian consumers would be severely harmed.

Executive Summary

The analysis in the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission’s Preliminary Report for the Digital Platforms Inquiry is inadequate in several ways, most notably:

  • It mischaracterizes the relationship between changes in the economics of media advertising and the rise of digital platforms such as Facebook and Google.
  • Its analysis of the dynamics of media diversity is misguided.
  • Its competition analysis assumes its results and makes unsupportable claims about the division of advertising markets.
  • It is recklessly unconcerned with the freedom of speech consequences of its recommendations.
  • It fails to recognize, and proposes to supplant, the ongoing social negotiation over data privacy.
  • It provides a poor analytic base on which to make policy recommendations, as it applies a static, rather than dynamic, approach to its analysis.

There is a real danger that if the policy recommendations outlined in the preliminary report were to be adopted, Australian consumers would be severely harmed.

Click here to read the full comments.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Geoffrey Manne, Federalist Society Teleforum on Qualcomm v. FTC

Presentations & Interviews On Feb 12th ICLE President & Founder Geoffrey Manne joined Olivier Blanchard, Senior Analyst at Futurum Research on the Federalist Society Teleforum Podcast. On the . . .

On Feb 12th ICLE President & Founder Geoffrey Manne joined Olivier Blanchard, Senior Analyst at Futurum Research on the Federalist Society Teleforum Podcast. On the podcast, they discussed the pending decision in the FTC’s controversial Section 5 lawsuit against Qualcomm.

Among other things, the FTC is seeking to permanently enjoin Qualcomm from engaging in certain industry-wide patent licensing practices, which the FTC alleges impair competition in violation of the antitrust laws. However, it has been argued that the FTC’s novel theory fails to meet the burden of proof by showing actual evidence of harm, as clarified recently by the US Supreme Court in Ohio v. American Express Co. The consequences of FTC’s legal theory, if upheld by the court, could reach well-beyond patent licensing arrangements.  Indeed, some experts fear that changes to Qualcomm’s business model will undermine U.S. national security interests and cede American leadership in the 5G race to a foreign adversary—the same concerns echoed last year by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) when it recommended that the President permanently prohibit Broadcom from acquiring Qualcomm.

The full episode is embedded below.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated: Post-Mortem

Presentations & Interviews Geoffrey Manne joins Olivier Blanchard on the Federalist Society teleforum to discuss the potential impact of the Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated decision.

This teleforum will investigate the potential impact of the pending decision in the FTC’s controversial Section 5 lawsuit against Qualcomm, brought days before the change in administration two years ago, with the incoming acting chair writing an unusual and biting dissent. Among other things, the FTC is seeking to permanently enjoin Qualcomm from engaging in certain industry-wide patent licensing practices, which the FTC alleges impair competition in violation of the antitrust laws. However, it has been argued that the FTC’s novel theory fails to meet the burden of proof by showing actual evidence of harm, as clarified recently by the US Supreme Court in Ohio v. American Express Co. The consequences of FTC’s legal theory, if upheld by the court, could reach well-beyond patent licensing arrangements.  Indeed, some experts fear that changes to Qualcomm’s business model will undermine U.S. national security interests and cede American leadership in the 5G race to a foreign adversary—the same concerns echoed last year by the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States (CFIUS) when it recommended that the President permanently prohibit Broadcom from acquiring Qualcomm.

Featuring: 

Olivier Blanchard, Senior Analyst, Futurum Research

Geoffrey A. Manne, President and Founder, International Center for Law & Economics

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Doing double damage: The German competition authority’s Facebook decision manages to undermine both antitrust and data protection law

TOTM The German Bundeskartellamt (Federal Cartel Office or FCO) this week reached a decision in its nearly 3-year-old Facebook investigation.

The German Bundeskartellamt (Federal Cartel Office or FCO) this week reached a decision in its nearly 3-year-old Facebook investigation. The decision appears to be based not on a violation of competition rules per se, but, at root, on alleged violations of European data protection rules. Perhaps unsurprisingly, some commentators — who view the case from a purely idiosyncratic, outcome-driven perspective — are praising the agency. But the reality is that the decision is unsound from either a competition or privacy policy perspective and will only make the fraught privacy/antitrust relationship worse.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection