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
EU Weighs Potential Role as Competing Bids for Warner Bros. Discovery Intensify
Dec 10, 2025 by
CPI
Trump Opposes Warner Bros. Sale Without CNN
Dec 10, 2025 by
CPI
EU Court Cuts Intel Fine but Confirms Antitrust Breach
Dec 10, 2025 by
CPI
Prediction Markets Emerging as New Flash Point Between Federal and State Regulators
Dec 10, 2025 by
CPI
CoStar Urges Supreme Court to Block Antitrust Claims in CREXi Fight
Dec 10, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Acqui-hiring
Dec 11, 2025 by
CPI
Anticompetitive Effects of Acquihires: Labor and Product Markets
Dec 11, 2025 by
Heski Bar-Isaac, Justin Johnson & Volker Nocke
Acquihires In the Technology Sector: Antitrust Scrutiny Through the Lens of Economics
Dec 11, 2025 by
Juliette Caminade, Rebecca Kirk Fair, Zsolt Udvari & Jeanne Vellard Smith
M&A in the AI Era: Considerations for Acquihiring
Dec 11, 2025 by
Ingrid Vandenborre, Kenneth Schwartz, Christopher Barlow, Page Griffin, Michael Cardella, Stuart Levi, Taylor Votek, Benjamin Salzer, Lisa G. Liu & Liz Kraus
Lock Them Up, or Take No Prisoners? Merger Policy and Acquiring AI Talent: Human Rights and Other Inconvenient Facts
Dec 11, 2025 by
Simon R. Pritchard