Showing Latest Publications

Rolled by Rewheel, Redux

TOTM The Finnish consultancy Rewheel periodically issues reports using mobile wireless pricing information to make claims about which countries’ markets are competitive and which are not. . . .

The Finnish consultancy Rewheel periodically issues reports using mobile wireless pricing information to make claims about which countries’ markets are competitive and which are not. For example, Rewheel claims Canada and Greece have the “least competitive monthly prices” while the United Kingdom and Finland have the most competitive.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Telecommunications & Regulated Utilities

Facebook and the Pros and Cons of Ex Post Merger Reviews

TOTM The Federal Trade Commission and 46 state attorneys general (along with the District of Columbia and the Territory of Guam) filed their long-awaited complaints against Facebook Dec. 9. The . . .

The Federal Trade Commission and 46 state attorneys general (along with the District of Columbia and the Territory of Guam) filed their long-awaited complaints against Facebook Dec. 9. The crux of the arguments in both lawsuits is that Facebook pursued a series of acquisitions over the past decade that aimed to cement its prominent position in the “personal social media networking” market.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Geo-Blocking: What is it Good For… A Surprising Amount, Actually

TOTM The European Court of Justice issued its long-awaited ruling Dec. 9 in the Groupe Canal+ case. The case centered on licensing agreements in which Paramount Pictures granted . . .

The European Court of Justice issued its long-awaited ruling Dec. 9 in the Groupe Canal+ case. The case centered on licensing agreements in which Paramount Pictures granted absolute territorial exclusivity to several European broadcasters, including Canal+.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Intellectual Property & Licensing

Time to hang up on a bad anti-robocall law

Popular Media The subject of robocalls went before the U.S. Supreme Court this week, as the court heard arguments in a case that asks whether the computer programs Facebook . . .

The subject of robocalls went before the U.S. Supreme Court this week, as the court heard arguments in a case that asks whether the computer programs Facebook uses to send text messages are illegal under a 1991 law.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Telecommunications & Regulated Utilities

The FTC’s case for breaking up Facebook is deeply flawed – let’s hope it fails

Popular Media Facebook is being sued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and 48 US states for its acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram in 2014 and 2012, . . .

Facebook is being sued by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and 48 US states for its acquisitions of WhatsApp and Instagram in 2014 and 2012, respectively (as well as over restrictions about third-party API access to Facebook’s platform, which I will not try to cover here). If these plaintiffs are successful, they could lead to Facebook being forced to sell those services, meaning a break-up of Facebook Inc itself.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Antitrust & Consumer Protection

Conflict of Interest in Prosecuting Police Officers: Examining the Incentives Facing District Attorneys

TOTM High-profile cases like those of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Kentucky, have garnered attention from the media and the academy . . .

High-profile cases like those of Michael Brown in Ferguson, Missouri, and Breonna Taylor in Louisville, Kentucky, have garnered attention from the media and the academy alike about decisions by grand juries not to charge police officers with homicide.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading

Righting Incentives to Combat Online Piracy

TOTM More than two decades after Congress sought to strike a balance between the interests of creators and service providers with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), it . . .

More than two decades after Congress sought to strike a balance between the interests of creators and service providers with the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA), it is clear that Section 512 of the Copyright Act has failed to create the right incentives to curb online copyright infringement. Indeed, as a May report from the U.S. Copyright Office concluded, the “original intended balance has been tilted askew.”

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Intellectual Property & Licensing

Comments to Senator Tillis, Request for Recommendations on Reforms to Section 512 of the Copyright Act

Written Testimonies & Filings We believe that Section 512 revisions should create greater incentives for online service providers to prevent unauthorized dissemination in the first place. Ideally, service providers should license the content so that copyright holders, Internet users, and OSPs themselves can all benefit from a healthier online ecosystem.

We thank Senator Tillis and his staff for undertaking this important examination of the operation of the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (DMCA). As we note in more detail below, copyright law is overdue for review in light of the evolution of the online ecosystem over the last two decades.

The Constitution recognizes that copyright provides incentive for the creation and wide dissemination of works to the public’s benefit by granting copyright holders the exclusive right to determine whether and how to make their works available. The ease with which content can be disseminated online without authorization, however, cuts at the core of the exclusive rights, and thus also at the engine that drives investment in content.

Section 512 was meant to secure for copyright holders better protection for their works online, while at the same time provide online service providers (“OSPs”) more certainty that they would not face unreasonable litigation risk when facilitating socially valuable dissemination of user-generated content, which might contain copyrighted material. The idea was to grant OSPs a safe harbor from liability in exchange for collaborating with copyright holders to curb unauthorized dissemination. The hope was that by sharing the burden to combat online piracy between copyright holders and OSPs, their mutual interests in creating a lawful market for online consumption of content would align.

Yet Section 512, as applied today, puts a greater burden on copyright holders than is optimal. As a result, the law enables excessive proliferation of illegal content. Under the current regime, the onus is on copyright holders to discover and flag unauthorized dissemination of their works; OSPs have little obligation to preempt sharing of unauthorized content and are generally obligated only to take down unauthorized content once notified by the copyright holder. The problem is that, at that point, dissemination has already occurred and much of the harm has already been done. Even one unauthorized digital copy of a copyrighted work that slips onto the Internet can quickly become thousands.

We believe that Section 512 revisions should create greater incentives for online service providers to prevent unauthorized dissemination in the first place. Ideally, service providers should license the content so that copyright holders, Internet users, and OSPs themselves can all benefit from a healthier online ecosystem.

Toward that end, we propose statutory changes that could improve the ability of rights holders to defend their property rights without undermining the ability of OSPs to operate efficiently. These ideas will undoubtedly require further elaboration as you continue your DMCA reform process in the new year, and we welcome the opportunity to participate in the ongoing discussion.

Click here to read the full comments PDF

 

Continue reading
Intellectual Property & Licensing

Big Tech but Bigger Ideas

TOTM As an academic working at the intersection of economics, law, and innovation, I was excited to see Nicolas Petit apply an interdisciplinary approach to investigate . . .

As an academic working at the intersection of economics, law, and innovation, I was excited to see Nicolas Petit apply an interdisciplinary approach to investigate big tech in the digital economy. Working across law, business, and engineering has taught me the importance of bringing together different theoretical perspectives and mindsets to address complex issues. [RL1] Below is a short discussion of a few interdisciplinary areas where Petit helps us to bridge the theoretical gap so as to unveil the complexity and provide new insights for policymakers.

Read the full piece here.

Continue reading
Intellectual Property & Licensing