The FTC and DOJ have done it: on July 19 they released the long awaited (or dreaded) draft merger guidelines, which . . . well, could have been worse, given current agency leadership, but could have been better (as demonstrated by the certainly imperfect, but still better, 2010 guidelines they replaced). Jumping on the agencies’ myopia bandwagon, I protest: it’s late July and I’m on vacation, damnit! Having been deep in the central American jungle, I’m late to this party, even as the party I’d long planned has been interrupted. Serious analysis will take a bit of time. For now, I have a few p ..read more

Introduction On July 19, the Department of Justice (DOJ) and Federal Trade Commission (FTC) (the agencies) finally issued new draft Merger Guidelines (DMG), open to public comments for two months. The DMG embody a set of thirteen individual Guidelines, which “are not exhaustive of the ways that a merger may substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly” (Guideline 13). Coincidentally or not, the decision to promulgate thirteen Guidelines is a bad omen – the DMG are fatally flawed from start to finish. A brief overview The DMG are an anti-merger manifesto. They ignore economic l ..read more

Yesterday, Lina Khan’s FTC released their long-awaited draft merger guidelines for public comment. Regrettably yet unsurprisingly, the new guidelines are a radical departure from established case law and antitrust thinking. They’re marked by a failure to account for the role of efficiencies in the competitive process, and a failure to distinguish between the implications of generally pro-competitive vertical mergers and horizontal mergers. If the FTC’s 0-4 losing track record in merger litigation so far is any indication, then they’re likely to be struck down by courts nationwide. On ..read more

Fifteen months after the close of the comment period, we finally have the release of the draft merger guidelines by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) and the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ).  While there is a lot to digest in the 51 page document with over 100 (largely stale) footnotes, the broad picture is clear: the goal of this document is to stop more mergers. Period.  To achieve that end, the guidelines have jettisoned the insights from economics that antitrust has learned over the past 60 years and moved back to a world where virtually all conduct is presumed to be ant ..read more

After the oral arguments in Twitter v. Taamneh, Geoffrey Manne, Kristian Stout, and I spilled a lot of ink thinking through the law & economics of intermediary liability and how to draw lines when it comes to social-media companies’ responsibility to prevent online harms stemming from illegal conduct on their platforms. With the Supreme Court’s recent decision in Twitter v. Taamneh, it is worth revisiting that post to see what we got right, as well as what the opinion could mean for future First Amendment cases—particularly those concerning Texas and Florida’s common-carriage laws and oth ..read more

Some may refer to this as the Roundup Formerly Known as the FTC Roundup. If you recorded yourself while reading out loud, and your name is Dove, that is what it sounds like when doves sigh.  Maybe He Never Said ‘Never’ The U.S. Justice Department’s (DOJ) Antitrust Division recently agreed to settle its challenge of Swedish conglomerate Assa Abloy’s proposed acquisition of the hardware and home-improvement division of Spectrum Brands.Assa Abloy will divest certain assets as a condition of settling the case and consummating the merger. That’s of interest to those following residential-door ..read more

Brexit was supposed to free the United Kingdom from Brussels’ heavy-handed regulation and red tape. But dreams of a Singapore-on-the-Thames are slowly giving way to ill-considered regulation that threatens to erode Britain’s position as one of the world’s leading tech hubs.  The UK Competition and Markets Authority’s recent decision to block the merger of Microsoft and game-maker Activision-Blizzard offers a case in point. Less than a month after the CMA formally announced its opposition to the deal, the European Commission has thrown a spanner in the works. Looking at the same facts, th ..read more

The United Kingdom’s 2016 “Brexit” decision to leave the European Union created the opportunity for the elimination of unwarranted and excessive EU regulations that had constrained UK economic growth and efficiency. Recognizing that fact, former Prime Minister Boris Johnson launched the Task Force on Innovation, Growth, and Regulatory Reform, whose May 2021 report recommended “a new regulatory vision for the UK.” That vision emphasized “[p]romot[ing] productivity, competition and innovation through a new framework of proportionate, agile and less bureaucratic regulation.” Despite it containin ..read more

[The following is a guest post from Neil Chilson, a senior research fellow with the Center for Growth and Opportunity at Utah State University and former chief technologist of the Federal Trade Commission.] The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) last week held its first informal hearing in 20 years on Section 18 rulemaking. The hearing itself had a technical delay, which to us participants felt like another 20 years, but was a mere two hours or so. At issue is a proposed rule intended to target impersonation fraud. Impersonation fraudsters hold themselves out as government officials or company re ..read more

The United Kingdom’s Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) late last month moved to block Microsoft’s proposed vertical acquisition of Activision Blizzard, a video-game developer that creates and publishes games such as Call of Duty, World of Warcraft, Diablo, and Overwatch. Microsoft summarized this transaction’s substantial benefits to video game players in its January 2022 press release announcing the proposed merger. The CMA based its decision on speculative future harm in UK cloud-based gaming, neglecting the dramatic and far more likely dynamic competitive benefits the transaction wou ..read more