Harry First, Nov 01, 2009
Professor Einer Elhauge´s most recent article, Tying, Bundled Discounts, and the Death of the Single Monopoly Profit Theory, begins with a critique of the thrall in which the single monopoly profit theory has held tying law and ends with an affirmation of the current state of the law: The current quasi-per se rule thus correctly condemns ties based on tying market power absent offsetting efficiencies, even without substantial tied foreclosure. I like the beginning and I like the destination. Its the journey that is not without some problems for me. I divide this essay into two parts. First I want to talk about the goals of antitrust. Second I offer some comments on Professor Elhauge´s approach to tying and the importance of the one monopoly profit theory.
Featured News
Acima Reaches Deal With 43 States Over Consumer Leasing Practices
Nov 12, 2026 by
CPI
Michigan Takes Aim at Mackinac Island Ferry Monopoly in Antitrust Fight
Nov 12, 2026 by
CPI
Farmers Union Blames Corporate Consolidation for Rising Grocery Costs
Nov 12, 2026 by
CPI
South Korea Weighs Bank-Controlled Stablecoin Rules as Fintech Firms Push Back
Nov 12, 2026 by
CPI
EU Closes Antitrust Probe Into Dutch Rail Operator NS
Nov 12, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – Data Portability
Nov 12, 2026 by
CPI
Mandating Access to a Dominant Platform’s Inferred Data: A Two Scenario Diagnosis
Nov 12, 2026 by
Sean Ennis
Data Portability Between Individual Control and Data Sharing at Scale
Nov 12, 2026 by
Jasper van den Boom & Inge Graef
Information Also Wants to Be Expensive: Data Portability and the Open-Systems Creed
Nov 12, 2026 by
Justin (Gus) Hurwitz
Data Portability’s Cybersecurity Paradox: When Protecting Consumer Data Restricts Competition
Nov 12, 2026 by
Sasha Hondagneu-Messner