On May 23, 2019, Prof. Joshua D. Wright traveled to Shandong University in Jinan, China, to deliver the keynote address at the 1st International Conference on Antitrust Law and Economics. Prof. Wright’s speech was entitled, “Would Hipster Antitrust Proposals Chill Innovation and Slow the Digital Economy? Evaluating the Evidence.” His presentation focused on his work within his article, “Requiem for a Paradox: The Dubious Rise and Inevitable Fall of Hipster Antitrust.”
Read Prof. Joshua D. Wright and Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg’s new article “A Bargaining Model v. Reality in FTC v. Qualcomm: A Reply to Kattan & Muris.” It reflects on bargaining models, testing theory against evidence, and implications of newly revealed Apple documents for the Federal trade Commission’s theory.
The abstract reads:
In a recent article Joe Kattan and Tim Muris (K&M) criticize our article on the predictive power of bargaining models in antitrust, in which we used two recent applications to explore implications for uses of bargaining models in courts and antitrust agencies moving forward. K&M focus exclusively upon one aspect of our prior article: We argued that, as in AT&T/Time Warner, the market realities at issue in FTC v. Qualcomm are inconsistent with the use of Dr. Carl Shapiro’s bargaining model to predict competitive effects in the relevant market. K&M criticize our analysis and invite us to delve more deeply into the record evidence presented at trial, which they argue support the FTC’s case and Dr. Shapiro’s economic analysis. We accept their invitation […]
On May 15th, 2019, the GAI submitted a Comment to the Infocommunications Media Development Authority (IMDA) for consideration in relation to its Convergence of Competition Code for the Media and Telecommunications Markets.
In this Comment, we address Part XII: Competition in a Digital Economy, where the IMDA engages in an important discussion regarding the role of competition policy in the digital economy. It is absolutely critical to get competition policy right in this key sector given that innovation drives most of the growth in a modern economy. We proceed by addressing each key paragraph of Part XII.
Read Prof. John M. Yun and Seth B. Sacher’s new working paper entitled, “Twelve Fallacies of the ‘Neo-Antitrust’ Movement.” The abstract reads:
Antitrust enforcement is back in the spotlight with advocates from both the political left and the populist political right demanding fundamental competition policy changes. While there are differences among those calling for such changes, several common beliefs generally unite them.
The GAI’s John M. Yun recently wrote an article for Competition Policy International, entitled, “News Media Cartels are Bad News for Consumers.” The article reads:
Antitrust has two legal standards by which to assess firm conduct. The first is the rule of reason, which applies to the majority of antitrust matters that appear before competition agencies. The second standard is per se condemnation, which is reserved for conduct that is deemed so plainly harmful that the act itself is sufficient to find liability — the canonical example being cartel price fixing.
On Wednesday, April 24, the Global Antitrust Institute and the C. Boyden Gray Center for the Study of the Administrative State cohosted a lunch and discussion for Scalia Law students. The event featured Federal Trade Commission General Counsel Alden Abbott. After an introduction by Prof. Joshua D. Wright, Mr. Abbott discussed his career in various agencies as well as careers available in antitrust and administrative law.
Congrats to the Global Antitrust Institute for winning 2 Concurrences Antitrust Writing Awards for 2019!
The GAI’s Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg, along with Jorge Padilla and Koren W. Wrong-Ervin, received the 2019 Antitrust Writing Award for Best Antitrust Academic Article in the Intellectual Property Category for “Antitrust Analysis Involving Intellectual Property and Standards: Implications from Economics.”
The GAI’s Joshua D. Wright, along with Elyse Dorsey and Jan Rybnicek, won Best Antitrust Business Article in the General Category for, “Hipster Antitrust meets Public Choice Economics: The Consumer Welfare Standard, the Rule of Law and Rent Seeking.”
Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg, along with Robin Jacob & Jean François Bellis, wrote an article for the CPI Antitrust Chronicle March 2019. The article, entitled, “Effects-Based Analysis: Where Do We Stand on Both Sides of the Atlantic?,” reads:
“J.–F. Bellis: I wish to thank Judge Douglas Ginsburg and Sir Robin Jacob, two famous judges and noted scholars in the field of competition and IP law, for having agreed to participate in this panel. The effects-based analysis is a topic which has attracted much attention in Europe in the last 20 years.”
Professor Pinar Akman, Professor of Law at the University of Leeds and Director of the Centre for Business Law and Practice, visited the GAI as a visiting scholar from Wednesday, March 27 to Friday, April 5, 2019.
She presented her paper at the Levy Workshop on Tuesday, April 2nd from 12:00pm – 1:15pm. We were honored to have her join us.
On Thursday, March 28, the Global Antitrust Institute hosted A Conversation with Associate Justice Neil M. Gorsuch and Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg Followed by a Panel Discussion: Antitrust and Digital Platforms Around the World. This successful event will become an annual event!
On March 11, 2019, the GAI submitted a comment to the United States Federal Trade Commission (FTC) in response to the FTC Hearing on Consumer Privacy and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century.
The comment reads:
Deception is one of the pillars of the FTC’s consumer protection authority under Section 5 of the FTC Act. Since the FTC’s landmark Policy Statement on Deception (“Deception Statement”) was issued in 1983, materiality has been established as one of the three key elements of a deception case. In this comment, we discuss the role of deception and materiality in consumer protection and consider how economic analysis can sharpen consumer protection enforcement efforts. Ultimately, we find that strong adherence to the materiality standard is a critical component of an enforcement regime that promotes consumer welfare. Deception enforcement untethered from materiality runs the risk of making consumers worse off by chilling pro-consumer behavior.
Exciting News at Scalia Law: Largest Gift in Mason History –
The Global Antitrust Institute is pleased to share some exciting, historic news: The Antonin Scalia Law School has just announced that it has received a $50M dollar gift; the largest gift in George Mason University’s history and the second largest reported law school gift in history. This gift will support 13 new faculty chairs at approximately $4M each. These endowed chairs will further strengthen our ability to provide top-notch legal education for our students.
On March 5th, the GAI’s Executive Director, Joshua Wright testified at a Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy, and Consumer Rights Hearing entitled, “Does America Have a Monopoly Problem?: Examining Concentration and Competition in the US Economy”
On February 22nd, The GAI submitted a comment to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) addressing the Commission Hearings on Competition and Consumer Privacy in the 21st Century: Consumer Privacy. In the comment, professors Tad Lipsky, Joshua Wright, John Yun, and Judge Douglas Ginsburg recommended two ways the FTC can use economics to improve its approach to unfairness. They suggested incorporating platform economics into nondisclosure cases, and using the talent and resources of the Bureau of Economics to better understand the benefits and harms that flow from collection, use, and sharing of consumer data.
Check out the GAI’s Competition Advocacy Program for more comments.
The Global Antitrust Institute has been nominated for the Global Competition Review’s: Academic or Advocacy Excellence Award, which is awarded to an academic competition specialist or advocacy organization that made an outstanding contribution to competition policy in 2018. Vote for GAI here.
In the past year, the GAI published a record 33 articles, papers, and chapters in books. We are also very proud to announce that the GAI faculty has had the most articles nominated for Concurrences Antitrust Writing Awards out of any academic institutions and the most nominations out of any research center across all years!
Specifically, the GAI proudly received eight nominations for the Concurrences Antitrust Writing Awards (2019), which includes six articles and two comments by the GAI faculty.
Check out GAI’s other nominations & awards here.
The Global Antitrust Institute recently wrote a letter to Secretary Wilbur Ross of the U.S. Department of Commerce and Under Secretary Iancu of Commerce for the Intellectual Property and the Director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office. The letter shows support for the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice in its announcement that it will adopt an evidence-based approach to applying the antitrust law to intellectual property rights. It reads:
Dear Secretary Ross and Under Secretary Iancu:
The Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) was founded on the belief that when judges and regulators around the world have a deeper understanding of economics, they are more likely to make decisions that enhance consumer welfare and promote innovation. The GAI is a non-profit organization housed at the Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University, that collaborates with leading academic centers in Asia, Europe, and Latin America to promote economically-informed decision making and policy.
As previously addressed in a letter submitted to Assistant Attorney General Makan Delrahim on February 13, 2018, the GAI supports the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice in its announcement that it will adopt an evidence-based approach to applying the antitrust law to intellectual property rights. The Antitrust Division has carefully laid out a position, based upon strong legal and economic foundation, that calibrates the interests of both innovators who develop and implementers who use technological standards in industries characterized by high levels of innovation. We are confident this approach ensures balanced protection of innovators, implementers, and consumers. We append the February 13 letter for your consideration.
On February 16-17, 2019, the GAI hosted it’s 5th Annual Invitational Moot Court Competition.
The competition was also hosted by the Antonin Scalia Law School Moot Court Board in conjunction with Judge Douglas H. Ginsburg of the United States Circuit Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia.
The Global Antitrust Institute Invitational is the only moot court competition in the United States devoted exclusively to antitrust law and offers a unique opportunity for invited law schools. Competing teams will not only compete in a federal circuit court, but also will have opportunities to attend a private reception and network with an extensive list of litigation and antitrust professionals from the Washington, D.C. area.
Click here for more information about the Moot Court Competition.
On February 15th, the GAI’s Joshua Wright and John Yun were panelists during the George Mason Law Review’s 22nd Annual Antitrust Symposium.
John Yun discussed “Remedying Merger Remedies” and Joshua Wright spoke about “Antitrust and Big Tech.”
The symposium featured two keynote speakers – Makan Delrahim, Assistant Attorney General, US Department of Justice Antitrust Division and Christine S. Wilson, Commissioner, US Federal Trade Commission. Other panel topics included “Antitrust Litigation: ‘TwIqbal’ a Decade Later” and “Reviewing CFIUS Review: National Security, Industrial Policy, and Competition Law.”
On December 6 and 7, 2018, the GAI’s John Yun traveled to Latvia to teach a lecture entitled, “Is Big Data a barrier to
entry” at the Erasmus+ Jean Monnet Conference on Competition, Big Data and Fundamental Rights, hosted by Riga Graduate School of Law (RGSL).
Watch his lecture online here.
On January 22nd, the GAI team submitted a Comment to the Australian Competition & Consumer Commission (ACCC) for consideration in relation to its Digital Platforms Inquiry, Preliminary Report (2018). The Comment details several fundamental methodological shortcomings and analytical gaps in the Preliminary Report.
Check out the GAI’s Competition Advocacy Program for more comments.