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
Judge Halts New York Ban on Algorithmic Rent-Setting Software
Sep 30, 2026 by
CPI
Zillow Must Face Agent Antitrust Claims After Judge Rejects Dismissal Bid
Sep 30, 2026 by
CPI
California Expands Antitrust Law With New Powers to Target Monopolies
Sep 30, 2026 by
CPI
South Korea Antitrust Watchdog Moves Toward Sanctions Against Korean Air, Asiana
Sep 30, 2026 by
CPI
RealPage Wins Preliminary Injunction Against New York Algorithmic Rent-Setting Ban
Sep 30, 2026 by
CPI
Antitrust Mix by CPI
Antitrust Chronicle® – National Security
Sep 22, 2026 by
CPI
National Security in U.S. Antitrust Enforcement: Toward a More Disciplined Framework
Sep 22, 2026 by
Rod Rosenstein & Timothy Finley
The Department of War’s M&A Review Guidance: What Companies in the Defense Industry Need to Know
Sep 22, 2026 by
Eric Stocking & Paul Ney
National Security, Resilience and the Boundaries of Merger Control
Sep 22, 2026 by
Beatriz Marques
National Security and Competition: Building Resilient Telecommunications Networks
Sep 22, 2026 by
Roslyn Layton