Posted by Social Science Research Network
Data-Opolies
By Maurice E. Stucke (University of Tennessee) & Allen P. Grunes (The Konkurrenz Group)
Abstract: In contrast to the European Commission, the US Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission have not meaningfully prosecuted monopolistic abuses over the past 16 years. The US Supreme Court’s view on monopolies has also become forgiving. There is no empirical support that monopolies—whether in dynamic or static markets—are generally good for society.
Yes, one might say. But with the expansion of the data-driven economy, one has less to fear of monopolization. We debunk these myths in our book, Big Data and Competition Policy (Oxford University Press 2016). Our aim here is to summarize several reasons why data-driven markets can be monopolized, and identify one recent example of a data-driven exclusionary tactic. Thus, prosecuting monopolistic abuses is even more important in certain online industries.
Featured News
Judge Mehta Questions Both Sides in Landmark Google Antitrust Case
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
FCC Urges Urgent Funding for Removal of Chinese Telecom Equipment from U.S. Networks
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Former Pioneer CEO Facing Potential Criminal Charges For Colluding With OPEC
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
South Korea’s Antitrust Regulator Greenlights K-Pop Powerhouse Deal
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Exxon’s Pioneer Purchase Approved, Former CEO Barred from Board
May 2, 2024 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Economics of Criminal Antitrust
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Navigating Economic Expert Work in Criminal Antitrust Litigation
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
The Increased Importance of Economics in Cartel Cases
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
A Law and Economics Analysis of the Antitrust Treatment of Physician Collective Price Agreements
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI
Information Exchange In Criminal Antitrust Cases: How Economic Testimony Can Tip The Scales
Apr 19, 2024 by
CPI