Daniel Crane, Dec 20, 2012
Brantley raises important issues of law, economics, and policy about tying arrangements. Under current legal principles, Brantley was on solid ground in distinguishing between anticompetitive ties and those that might harm consumer interests without impairing competition. As a mat- ter of economics, the court was also right to reject the claim that the cable programmers forced consumers to pay for programs the customers didn’t want. The hardest question is a policy one- whether antitrust law should ever condemn the exploitation of market power in ways that extract surplus from consumers but do not create or enlarge market power. I shall argue that Brantley got this last question right as well.
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