What, exactly, is the effect of the highly debated practice of cable bundling on consumers? According to one US law professor, cable customers are overpaying $34 billion a year due to channel tying and bundling. Professor Warren Grimes, from Southwestern Law School, has released a new article in which he calculates the overage fees for unwatched channels consumers are forced to buy as part of a package. The paper, “The Cable Television Case: A Giant Step Toward Irrelevancy?”, comes in the wake of a failed class action filed in 2007 against television programmers; Grimes was part of the plaintiffs’ legal counsel during his time as litigator at O’Melveny & Myers. The professor reaches his $34 billion number based on cable practices in Canada, where, according to the author, consumers pay about $342 less per year for the same television they would receive in the US.
Featured News
Tech Policy and Regulation Weekly Roundup
Jan 23, 2026 by
CPI
Perkins Coie Adds Former DOJ Antitrust Leader as Partner in Washington
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
Ryanair Boss Dismisses Musk’s Buyout as Starlink Feud Escalates
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
Paramount Extends Warner Bros Bid as Netflix Rivalry Heats Up
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
South Korea Breaks New Ground With Landmark AI Law
Jan 22, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Recidivism
Jan 21, 2026 by
CPI
Recidivism, Multiple Offending, and Serial Offending in Antitrust
Jan 21, 2026 by
Gregory Werden
Antitrust Recidivism: Why Repeat Cases Appear, and Why True Reoffending Is Rare in the United States
Jan 21, 2026 by
Lisa M. Phelan, Megan S. Golden, Adrienne Irmer & Nina Worth
99 Antitrust Problems – Is Recidivism One?
Jan 21, 2026 by
Brian A. Ratner & Kartik S. Madiraju
Holding A Cat by the Tail: A View of Cartel Recidivism in U.S. Antitrust Enforcement
Jan 21, 2026 by
Mark Rosman & KaDee L. Ru