U.S. District Court Judge Amit Mehta’s Sept. 2 remedies opinion in the U.S. v. Google monopolization (Google Search) case is, in large part, a rejection of government regulation of digital platforms in the guise of antitrust. The limited and cabined conduct-related remedies it imposes are far less significant than its rejection of the U.S. Justice Department’s (DOJ) proposed conduct ... The Google Remedies Decision and Big Tech Antitrust The post The Google Remedies Decision and Big T...| Truth on the Market
Cartel collusion among competitors is widely seen as the “supreme evil of antitrust,” and for more than three decades, competition-law enforcers in the United States and abroad have cooperated to ferret out cartel activity. Beginning in the 1990s, major jurisdictions started to emphasize highly effective “leniency” agreements to get cartel members to inform on their ... Paying Whistleblowers to Take Down Cartels The post Paying Whistleblowers to Take Down Cartels appeared first on Tru...| Truth on the Market
A little bird (ok, a normal-size adult human being) has asked me a question about the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent decision in Trump v. CASA. It might not be the question on the tip of everyone’s tongue, although it’s a natural one for those interested in competition policy, administrative law, or all things (or at ... Mi CASA es Mi CASA The post Mi CASA es Mi CASA appeared first on Truth on the Market.| Truth on the Market
FTC v. Meta Platforms Inc. has gone to court, and trial is just underway in the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia. The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) alleges that Meta is currently, in 2025, engaged in monopolization in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act by dint of having acquired Instagram ... The FTC’s Zombie Antitrust Action Against Meta Continues to Lurch Forward| Truth on the Market
