antitrust and competition

Jonathan Masur and Eric Posner argue that the Federal Trade Commissions’ recent ban on noncompete clauses is lawful under the plain language of the Federal Trade Commission Act, longstanding court precedent, and well-established administrative law principles.

Recent contributions from Enrico Letta, Mario Draghi, and Emmanuel Macron are exposing however deep concerns that the European project is floundering. Cristina Caffarra writes that Letta, Draghi and Macron are collectively making an urgent call to tackle the reality of a “divided bloc” that has lost ground, rethink industrial policy, public good investments and reformulate traditional trade-offs. Explicitly acknowledging the end of the neoliberal vision that still occupies many European institutions (from antitrust to trade to industrial policy) will be important to “join the dots” and make the trade-offs clearer.

Luis Braido builds on Eric Posner and Carl Shapiro’s debate about the role of economics in merger review by further exploring the tension between efficiency and consumer welfare. He argues that efficiency merits endorsement as it boosts productivity, wealth, and social welfare. Nevertheless, he acknowledges that the law favors competition and consumer welfare over efficiency. From his perspective, enlarging the range of remedies available in merger review is central for protecting productivity gains while preserving competition and compensating consumers for adverse impacts.

Academics have argued that changes in product markup trends show that the European markets, abetted by the adoption of the Single Market and stronger antitrust enforcement, have become more competitive over the last half-century, whereas American markets have become more concentrated. In their research, Tommaso Crescioli and Angelo Martelli argue that a study of labor market power in Europe muddles this picture of higher competition in Europe.

Fiona Scott Morton and David Dinielli show how landmark antitrust cases historically have cleared the path for innovation in the next “frontier technology.” But with closing arguments in the search monopoly case just days away, Google threatens to evade this round of rigorous new competition. It reportedly is in talks to place its own artificial intelligence tool on Apple devices as it did in the case of search. Such a maneuver would entrench Google’s search monopoly and place Google in the driver’s seat to steer the development of consumer-facing AI. The authors offer up a menu of steps the government might take now to thwart Google’s new anticompetitive strategy and preserve competition in AI before it’s too late.

In new research, Yonghong An, Michael A. Williams, and Mo Xiao find that increases in an academic journal’s subscription price and its publisher’s market share leads to fewer article citations, hindering knowledge creation and research collaboration.

In new research, Ricardo Marto finds that the rise of services in the United States explains the rise in firm markups over the last few decades rather than a lack of competition.

A growing number of companies offer artificial intelligence-powered revenue management platforms, which leverage big data and sensitive business information from multiple firms to optimize pricing, output, and other operational decisions for their clients. Over the past 18 months, dozens of antitrust lawsuits have alleged that such platforms facilitate price-fixing among rivals. Barak Orbach explores the strength of the allegations and the antitrust implications of such revenue management platforms.

On March 13, the Ultimate Fighting Championship settled several lawsuits, including Cung Le v. Zuffa, which was scheduled to go to trial in April. The plaintiffs in Cung Le had accused the mixed martial arts organization of several anticompetitive behaviors that led to the suppression of fighter wages. Stephen F. Ross and Gurtej Grewal recount the facts of the case and what the settlement might mean for the industry.

Giovanna Massarotto writes that antitrust actions against major technology companies like AT&T, IBM, and Microsoft over the past century, though imperfect, have positively impacted innovation and competition in the computer industry by restricting anticompetitive behavior while allowing breakthrough technologies to flourish through carefully crafted remedies. This stands in contrast with Europe, which has seen less homegrown innovation from its technology companies.