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
Federal Antitrust Suit Targeting Aircraft Engine Sales Practices Is Settled
Dec 31, 2025 by
CPI
CFTC Withdraws Guidance on ‘Actual Delivery’ in Crypto Transactions, Leaving Regulatory Void
Dec 31, 2025 by
CPI
Coalition of State AGs Push Back Against FCC Proposal Seeking to Preempt State AI Laws
Dec 31, 2025 by
CPI
Apple Seeks to Overturn £1.5 Billion UK App Store Antitrust Ruling
Dec 31, 2025 by
CPI
Age-Restriction Laws Are Proliferating; So Too Are the Difficult Tradeoffs Policymakers Face
Dec 23, 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