Herbert Hovenkamp, Apr 01, 2006
The success of the Areeda-Turner test for predatory pricing and the U.S. Supreme Court’s adoption of demanding proof requirements in its 1993 Brooke Group decision have made it very difficult for plaintiffs to win conventional predatory pricing claims. While many challenges to exclusionary pricing continue to be made, the legal theory has evolved away from classical predation to a variety of other theories. This paper examines the state of the law of both conventional predatory pricing and these recent variants and offers some recommendations.
Featured News
Coinbase Sues Three States Over Prediction Market Regulations
Dec 19, 2025 by
CPI
Walmart and PayPal Execs Say Prompts Could Trigger AI-Driven Coordination
Dec 19, 2025 by
CPI
Trump Signals New Openness to Filling Democratic Seats on SEC, CFTC, Easing Frictions Over Crypto Bill
Dec 19, 2025 by
CPI
Mexico Antitrust Authority Closes Android Competition Case After Google Commitments
Dec 18, 2025 by
CPI
LinkedIn Antitrust Settlement Faces Setback in California Court
Dec 18, 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