Joseph Farrell, Michael Katz, Nov 01, 2006
There has been considerable debate concerning whether consumer surplus or total surplus should be the welfare standard for antitrust. This debate misses two critical issues. First, antitrust is not straightforwardly welfarist. It does not maximize but protects, and it does not forbid all actions that seem likely to lower some welfare measure. Second, the enforcement process involves multiple steps and multiple decision makers. The authors conclude that, while some popular arguments for a consumer surplus standard are weak, other arguments have some merit.
Links to Full Content
Featured News
UK Approves £15 Billion Vodafone-Three Merger With Conditions
Dec 5, 2024 by
CPI
Mastercard Settlement Faces Challenge in Landmark Consumer Case
Dec 4, 2024 by
CPI
Novartis Loses Appeal to Delay US Launch of Entresto Generic
Dec 4, 2024 by
CPI
UK Delays Provisional Findings in Cloud Market Probe to January
Dec 4, 2024 by
CPI
EU Probes Nvidia Over Alleged Bundling Practices Amid Run:ai Acquisition Scrutiny
Dec 4, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Moats & Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Assessing the Potential for Antitrust Moats and Trenches in the Generative AI Industry
Nov 29, 2024 by
Allison Holt, Sushrut Jain & Ashley Zhou
How SEP Hold-up Can Lead to Entrenchment
Nov 29, 2024 by
Jay Jurata, Elena Kamenir & Christie Boyden
The Role of Moats in Unlocking Economic Growth
Nov 29, 2024 by
CPI
Overcoming Moats and Entrenchment: Disruptive Innovation in Generative AI May Be More Successful than Regulation
Nov 29, 2024 by
Simon Chisholm & Charlie Whitehead