//
czytasz...

Week in Antitrust (May 5 – 11)

By ⋅ Maj 13, 2008 ⋅ Post a comment
  • May 6: Professor Josh Wright (GMU Law) continues his outstanding series about present and future of Law and Economics movement and scholarship.
  • May 8: Professor Thom Lambert (MU Law) discusses FTC’s opinion in case of Nine West in which Commission seems to belittle as much as possible Supreme Court’s decision in the Leegin case.
    In Leegin Supreme Court held that resale price maintenance is to be treated under the Rule of Reason (thus overruling the 1911 Dr. Miles decision). According to FTC, RoR means that each instance of RPM should be considered illegal unless accused firm proves the opposite!
    Lambert points out very important fact about RPM – it’s really hard to use RPM to accomplish anti-competitive ends. I’m just wondering how it’s possible that so well educated folks at FTC are unable to follow not only logic of the Supreme Court’s decisions, but also – basic economics?
  • May 9: Microsoft endeavors to avoid paying 899 million euro fine imposed by the EU Commission.
  • May 11: Global Competition Review published results of 2008 „40 under 40″ survey. Congratulations for all winners! Competition was strong (over 1,000 nominees) as always among competition lawyers…
  • May 11: Steve Hannaford, in his post First a merger, then a demerger, is discussing whether synergy and market power are always product of a merger. As an example of ArvinMeritor shows us, it’s not really so. But, as for official executive statements: In other words, whatever I say is right when I say it.

Discussion

No comments yet.

Post a Comment

O autorze

Mikołaj Barczentewicz interesuje się teorią prawa, ekonomiczną analizą prawa oraz prawem konkurencji. Autor współpracuje z kancelarią Domański Zakrzewski Palinka. więcej »