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
Judge Pushes for Faster Pace in NASCAR Antitrust Trial
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
Trump Plans Executive Order This Week to Squelch State AI Regulations
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
US President Raises Antitrust Worries Over Netflix–Warner Bros. Deal
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
Freshfields Adds Former DOJ Antitrust Leader as Partner in San Francisco
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
Appeals Court Lifts Injunction, Allowing Florida to Enforce Social Media Age Restriction Law
Dec 8, 2025 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Intellectual Property
Nov 19, 2025 by
CPI
Dealing in Intellectual Property: IP Justifications and Defenses in Digital Markets Cases
Nov 19, 2025 by
Jennifer Dixton
The Evolving Role of Innovation Theories of Harm in the Antitrust Analysis of Life Science Mergers
Nov 19, 2025 by
Michelle Yost Hale, Matthew D. McDonald & Merrill Stovroff
Who Can Fix It? Antitrust, IP Rights, and the Right to Repair
Nov 19, 2025 by
Rosa M. Morales
Copyright, Antitrust, and the Politics of Generative AI
Nov 19, 2025 by
Daryl Lim