Tim Wu, Dec 20, 2013
Competition law and Intellectual Property have divergent intellectual cultures–the former more pragmatic and experimentalist; the latter influenced by natural law and vested rights. “The US Supreme Court decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Actavis is an intellectual victory for the former approach, one that suggests that antitrust law can and should be used to introduce greater scrutiny of the specific consequences of intellectual property grants…
Links to Full Content
Featured News
Hess Shareholders Approve $53 Billion Merger with Chevron
May 28, 2024 by
CPI
EU Regulators Engage with Telegram as App Nears Critical Usage Threshold
May 28, 2024 by
CPI
EEX Offers Remedies to Address EU Antitrust Concerns Over Nasdaq Deal
May 28, 2024 by
CPI
BRG Expands European Competition Practice with New Expert Team in Brussels
May 28, 2024 by
CPI
UK Law Empowers Regulators to Fine Big Tech Without Court Approval
May 28, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Merger Guidelines Retrospective
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
Mergers of Complements
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
Personality Traits, Private Equity, and Merger Analysis
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
The 2023 Merger Guidelines: Lessons in the Importance of Incipiency, Modern Economics, and Monopsony
May 21, 2024 by
CPI
The 2023 Merger Guidelines: Sharpening Merger Analysis
May 21, 2024 by
CPI