Daniel Crane, Dec 20, 2012
Brantley raises important issues of law, economics, and policy about tying arrangements. Under current legal principles, Brantley was on solid ground in distinguishing between anticompetitive ties and those that might harm consumer interests without impairing competition. As a mat- ter of economics, the court was also right to reject the claim that the cable programmers forced consumers to pay for programs the customers didn’t want. The hardest question is a policy one- whether antitrust law should ever condemn the exploitation of market power in ways that extract surplus from consumers but do not create or enlarge market power. I shall argue that Brantley got this last question right as well.
Featured News
DOJ Prosecutors Advise Against Criminal Charges in Live Nation Antitrust Probe
Dec 17, 2025 by
CPI
Supreme Court Closes Door on REX Antitrust Case Against Realtors Group
Dec 17, 2025 by
CPI
PepsiCo and Walmart Face Federal Lawsuit Alleging Long-Running Price-Fixing Scheme
Dec 17, 2025 by
CPI
Utah Reaches Antitrust Settlement With Sandoz Over Generic Drug Pricing
Dec 17, 2025 by
CPI
China Regulator Flags ‘Lowest-Price’ Demands as Potential Antitrust Violations
Dec 17, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – CRESSE Insights
Dec 16, 2025 by
CPI
Learning from Divergence: The Role of Cross-Country Comparisons in the Evaluation of the DMA
Dec 16, 2025 by
Federico Bruni
New Regulatory Tools for the EU Foreign Direct Investment Screening and Foreign Subsidies Regulation
Dec 16, 2025 by
Ioannis Kokkoris
“Suite Dreams”: Market Definition and Complementarity in the Digital Age
Dec 16, 2025 by
Romain Bizet & Matteo Foschi
The Interaction Between Competition Policy and Consumer Protection: Institutional Design, Behavioral Insights, and Emerging Challenges in Digital Markets
Dec 16, 2025 by
Alessandra Tonazzi