Research Programs
More
What are you looking for?
Showing Latest Publications
Presentations & Interviews Last June, Christine Varney, then a lawyer in private practice, now President Obama’s nominee to be the next Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, warned that . . .
Last June, Christine Varney, then a lawyer in private practice, now President Obama’s nominee to be the next Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, warned that Google, not Microsoft, is the monopolist of the future. “For me, Microsoft is so last century. They are not the problem,” Varney said at a June 19 panel discussion sponsored by the American Antitrust Institute. The U.S. economy will “continually see a problem — potentially with Google” because it already “has acquired a monopoly in Internet online advertising.” Concerns of this nature ultimately led Tom Barnett, the last Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, to threaten a Sherman Act monopolization lawsuit if Google went through with plans to buy Yahoo. Google, on the other hand, contends that the concerns are completely misplaced. “The nature of the Internet is just a fundamentally different world from the sale of packaged software or the bundling of software with OEMs (original equipment manufacturers),” according to Kent Walker, Google’s General Counsel. “The standard line we have is that competition is just one click away.”
Panelists:
Full audio is embedded below.
TOTM Apparently the Obama administration is not very confident about getting its environmental climate change agenda passed through Congress. Given a legislative “solution” is off the . . .
Apparently the Obama administration is not very confident about getting its environmental climate change agenda passed through Congress. Given a legislative “solution” is off the table, at least for the foreseeable future, perhaps it is not surprising that today the EPA announced it’s ruling that greenhouse gases are “a danger to public health and welfare“.
Read the full piece here.
Presentations & Interviews Last June, Christine Varney, then a lawyer in private practice, now President Obama's nominee to be the next Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, warned that Google, not Microsoft, is the monopolist of the future.
Last June, Christine Varney, then a lawyer in private practice, now President Obama’s nominee to be the next Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, warned that Google, not Microsoft, is the monopolist of the future.
“For me, Microsoft is so last century. They are not the problem,” Varney said at a June 19 panel discussion sponsored by the American Antitrust Institute. The U.S. economy will “continually see a problem — potentially with Google” because it already “has acquired a monopoly in Internet online advertising.” Concerns of this nature ultimately led Tom Barnett, the last Assistant Attorney General for Antitrust, to threaten a Sherman Act monopolization lawsuit if Google went through with plans to buy Yahoo.
Google, on the other hand, contends that the concerns are completely misplaced. “The nature of the Internet is just a fundamentally different world from the sale of packaged software or the bundling of software with OEMs (original equipment manufacturers),” according to Kent Walker, Google’s General Counsel. “The standard line we have is that competition is just one click away.
TOTM Here’s Henry Waxman on the federal government saving the newspapers from failing… Read the full piece here.
Here’s Henry Waxman on the federal government saving the newspapers from failing…
TOTM From Larry Ribstein: A few years later, Henry Butler and I wrote a book decrying SOX, and discussing the evidence that was accumulating against it, . . .
From Larry Ribstein:
A few years later, Henry Butler and I wrote a book decrying SOX, and discussing the evidence that was accumulating against it, as well as the SOX suit. Here’s an excerpt from the book abstract…
TOTM Well, you probably know my answer to that one. I was interested to read Fred von Lohmann’s short take on the privacy aspects of the . . .
Well, you probably know my answer to that one.
I was interested to read Fred von Lohmann’s short take on the privacy aspects of the Google Books Settlement, available here.
TOTM And now for something completely different. Being the only non-lawyer economist in the group seems to warrant such a preface sometimes. Read the full piece . . .
And now for something completely different. Being the only non-lawyer economist in the group seems to warrant such a preface sometimes.
TOTM My latest working paper, which bears the same title as this post, is now available on SSRN. In the paper, I address the challenge created . . .
My latest working paper, which bears the same title as this post, is now available on SSRN. In the paper, I address the challenge created by the Supreme Court’s 2007 Leegin decision, which abrogated the 96 year-old rule declaring resale price maintenance (RPM) to be per se illegal. The Leegin Court held that instances of RPM must instead be evaluated under antitrust’s more lenient rule of reason. It also directed lower courts to craft a structured liability analysis for separating pro- from anticompetitive instances of the practice.
TOTM So, AMD and Intel settled. Its a case we’ve covered here in significant detail. Terms haven’t been announced publicly. AAI has predictably argued that the . . .
So, AMD and Intel settled. Its a case we’ve covered here in significant detail. Terms haven’t been announced publicly. AAI has predictably argued that the settlement shouldn’t preclude further enforcement action from NY and the FTC. The NY Times suggests the same. They may be right, although Herb Hovenkamp, among others, has suggested that the settlement “has taken a lot of the wind out of the sails” of the FTC case.
