Herbert Hovenkamp, Apr 01, 2006
The success of the Areeda-Turner test for predatory pricing and the U.S. Supreme Court’s adoption of demanding proof requirements in its 1993 Brooke Group decision have made it very difficult for plaintiffs to win conventional predatory pricing claims. While many challenges to exclusionary pricing continue to be made, the legal theory has evolved away from classical predation to a variety of other theories. This paper examines the state of the law of both conventional predatory pricing and these recent variants and offers some recommendations.
Featured News
Disney Wins Dismissal of Most Claims in FuboTV Streaming Lawsuit
Sep 9, 2026 by
CPI
Mastercard Sued by 300 Hotel Companies in UK Over Swipe Fees
Sep 9, 2026 by
CPI
Paul Weiss Faces Disqualification Bid in Sugar Price-Fixing Litigation
Sep 9, 2026 by
CPI
Amazon Pushes Back on Early Discovery in New Jersey Antitrust Case
Sep 9, 2026 by
CPI
Paramount Seeks $1.88 Billion Bond as Warner Bros. Discovery Deal Faces Delay
Sep 9, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – State Attorneys General
Aug 27, 2026 by
CPI
CPI Talks… with Jonathan Skrmetti, Attorney General of Tennessee
Aug 27, 2026 by
Jonathan Skrmetti
What the Live Nation Jury Instructions Tell Us About California’s Unfair Competition Law
Aug 27, 2026 by
Henry Hauser, Brent Nakamura, Ashley Kaplan, Brian Wang & Cari Jeffries
From Backroom Deals to Public Scrutiny: The Tunney Act’s Past, Present, and Future
Aug 27, 2026 by
Christina M. Black & Ashley A. Locke
Understanding the Fragility of Economic Concentration Through the Principles of Ecology
Aug 27, 2026 by
Alexandra Spring