The Fourth Annual $10,000 Swope Antitrust Writing Prize Announced – Law Students, Judicial Clerks, Young Lawyers Eligible25 March, 2008
The competition, which honors former Antitrust Division official and Jones Day partner Bill Swope’s pioneering ability to clarify abstract and complex issues, is open to students currently enrolled in full- or part-time juris doctorate or more advance degree programs at U.S. law schools accredited by AALS and non-U.S. schools of equivalent standing. Current judicial clerks who have graduated from such programs and practicing lawyers who graduated from such degree programs in May 2003 or later are also invited to participate.
One $10,000 prize and two $1,500 honorable mention prizes will be awarded. Winners will attend the 2009 Spring Meeting of the American Bar Association Antitrust Section in Washington as guests of Jones Day and be guests of honor at a Firm reception. See more.
Recently published on Global Competition Policy.
Commentary on the Google/DoubleClick Clearance
|Competitor Complaints About Google/DoubleClick Rejected
Leah Brannon (Cleary Gottlieb)
Both the Commission and the FTC conducted extraordinarily thorough reviews, investigating various complaints ranging from the economically unsound to the truly bizarre.
Market Definition, Competition, and Privacy in the Google/DoubleClick Transaction
Lifting the Fog: Google/DoubleClick Demystified
Google/DoubleClick and the Power of Information to Raise Antitrust Concerns in Vertical Mergers
Critical Loss Analysis in Merger Review
|Critical Loss Analysis in the Whole Foods Case
Kevin Murphy & Robert Topel (University of Chicago Graduate School of Business)
The critical loss analysis used by Whole Foods’ economist is not useful as a general matter and cannot be used as a tool of market definition.
Beyond Critical Loss: Properly Applying the Hypothetical Monopolist Test
Reaction to the Intel Antitrust Allegations
|AMD v. Intel: An Assault on Price Competition
Robert Cooper (Gibson Dunn)
Accepting the notion that aggressively discounting prices might expose a company to a possible violation of the antitrust laws would chill the very price competition antitrust laws are meant to promote.
State of New York Launches Investigation of Intel: The Global Drumbeat Continues
The Federal Court of Appeal’s Decision in Labatt
|The Canadian Competition Bureau’s Attempt to Halt Beer Merger Goes Flat
Mark Katz (Davies Ward)
The FCA’s decision confirms that the threshold for relief under section 100 is more onerous than many in the Canadian competition bar had thought.
I recently received an entry in my Hungarian blog by the President of STOP CARTEL, Dr. George Cosmopoulos. Most news are about Greece yet, but I am curious how this interesting project will develop. The attitude is very harsh, but cartels are not funny things either.
The site has an antitrust TV, that currently broadcasts/podcasts/webcasts the documentary Fair Fight in the Marketplace. I think the movie is a really good documentary and explains basic problems with some typical competition law infringements.
The page has some entries, calling antitrust infringements crimes. Well I could agree with calling cartels a crime, but I think one should take a more sophisticated approach to abuse cases. They are not as clear cut as price fixing cartels.
Nevertheless the project is more than welcome. It just came to my mind that sometimes “Greenpeace like organisations” are needed to draw attention on practices that damage the society.
The 11th CLaSF Workshop
Thursday 10 April 2008, Strathclyde University,Lord Hope Building, Glasgow.
If you are interested in attending please contact Prof Barry Rodger <email@example.com>. If attending, please let Prof Rodger know if you will be staying on for the post workshop drinks and dinner.
09:00 – 09:25 Registration, Coffee and Pastries.
09:25 – 09:30 Introduction
9:30 – 11:30
Competition of Competition Law Systems: The Paradigm of Private Enforcement
Dr Assimakis P Komninos, White & Case, Brussels
The Quantification of Damages Claims in National Courts: recent developments
Dr Paolisa Nebbia, University of Leicester
Private Enforcement – What About Article 82?
Miss Hedvig K.S Schmidt, Law School, Southampton University
11:30 – 11:45 Coffee
11:45 – 13:00
Carrots and Sticks – Leniency, Fines and Settlement in EC Cartel Cases
Declan Walsh, Faculty of Law, UCC, Cork
Cartel Direct Settlements: A Blind Alley for DG Comp
Prof Alan Riley, City Law School, The City University London
13:00 – 14:00 Lunch
14:00 – 15:15
Lame Duck or Black Mamba: Can the Cartel Offence enhance deterrence?
Andreas Stephan, CCP and Norwich Law School, UEA
The Increasing Personalisation of Competition Enforcement
Paul Hughes, University of Westminster, London
15:15 – 15:30 Afternoon Tea
15:30 – 17:15
A Critical Assessment of the ECMR Reform
Ioannis Kokkoris and Krisztian Katona
Intellectual Property and Competition Law: Will Reforming Article 82 be enough?
Daryl Lim Tze Wei, Max Planck Institute
Hungarian Competition Policy as a Model-Child
Dr Szilagyi Pal, Competition Law Research Centre, Hungary
17:15 – 17:30 Final Comments and Close, followed by post-workshop drinks and dinner.