The newsletter of the ISBA’s Section on Antitrust & Unfair Competition Law
Browse articles by year: 2014 (3)
Newsletter articles from 2002
The antitrust implications of creative pricing strategies
The Sherman Act1 was enacted in 1890. It is a very straightforward law, prohibiting "contracts, combinations or conspiracies ... in restraint of trade" (Section 1) and monopolization or attempted monopolization of any part of trade or commerce (Section 2).
There was a large turnout for the November 20 joint CBA/ISBA program on the DOJ/FTC's extensive hearings and study of the interface between antitrust law and intellectual property rights.
There are two very interesting programs, for which there is no charge, that are going to be presented jointly by this Section in conjunction with the Chicago Bar Association's Antitrust Law Committee.
A corporation may be genuinely shocked to discover that some of its employees responsible for a division or a product line have been engaged in bid rigging or some other criminal antitrust conduct.
This opinion consolidates several cases arising out of an alleged conspiracy to fix the price of copper futures at artificially high levels on the international exchange markets in violation of Section 1 of the Sherman Act.
Plaintiff, manufacturer of purified bottled water sold around Lubbock, Texas, brought suit seeking damages based on: (1) Clayton Act § 3; (2) the parallel provision in the Texas Free Enterprise and Antitrust Act; and (3) state law claims of tortious interference with existing and prospective business relations.
Rediscovering coordinated effects
It has been said that life is largely a matter of expectation. Throughout my career in the antitrust field, I have been first and foremost a merger lawyer, and as a result I expected that the majority of my time at the Antitrust Division would be devoted to merger matters
Will Adam Smith’s statement be retired from trials?
A hoary but effective quote that government and plaintiff's counsel frequently use in their briefs and at trials in antitrust cases is Adam Smith's classic statement in the Wealth of Nations: