DOJ v. Google Ad Tech – Alleging Anticompetitive Harm Where None is Found
Businesses rely on many digital tools and resources to increase their visibility, connect with consumers, and offer their products and […]
Category
monopoly
The Decision in Google’s Monopolization Case May Benefit Competitors More Than Consumers
In a court decision last week between Google and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ), Judge Amit Mehta concluded that Google violated U.S. antitrust laws by entering into distribution agreements that established Google as the default search engine for third-party web browsers and mobile devices. Although the heart of the decision rested on the purported anticompetitive effects of these contractual agreements, an actual analysis of resulting consumer harm appears to be lacking.
Assessing Monopoly Power or Dominance in Platform Markets: A Summary
This post is part of a series covering different studies on antitrust enforcement of digital services released by various academics, […]
Antitrust in 60 Seconds: Issues with Monopolization Remedies
The 60-Second Read: The general agreement among antitrust scholars and practitioners is that remedies are important enough to be a […]
No, Every Big Internet Company Is Not a Monopoly
Earlier this week, Hollywood veteran Jonathan Taplin’s misleading op-ed in the New York Times did us the favor of compiling […]
The Disruptive Benefits of Zenefits (and Lemonade Stands)
You may not have heard of cloud-based business HR and insurance provider Zenefits, but the folks at industry giant Automatic […]
Popular Articles
-
The Internet Isn’t Harmful to Your Mental Health, Oxford Study Finds
-
Is the EU Batteries Regulation Charging Up for Trouble?
-
Motherless Repairs Some of Mavrix Damage
-
Security at Risk: How Today’s DMA Enforcement Risks Leaving Europeans Vulnerable to Spam and Scams
-
Why a Pending Court Case in Mexico could Undermine a Key Achievement of USMCA
