Antitrust Law Source

Podcasts

Episode 47
Breaking down the NCAA v. Alston SCOTUS decision

The sports and antitrust worlds eagerly awaited the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision in NCAA v. Alston, a case challenging to the NCAA’s right to limit compensation paid to student-athletes. On Monday, June 21, the Supreme Court upheld the decisions by the lower courts, which found in favor of student-athletes and forbade the NCAA or the collegiate conferences from enforcing rules that limited the amount of education-related expenses schools can offer to student-athletes. Jay and colleague Luke Fedlam, head of the firm’s Sports practice and host of the Protecting Your Possibilities Podcast, discuss the decision and its implications going forward for collegiate sports, student-athletes and the NCAA. Continue Reading

iTunes
Episode 46
The outlook for startups and emerging businesses

This year has been a year like no other.  In this episode, Jay talks to fellow partner Brett Thornton, chair of Porter Wright’s Energy, Biotech and Emerging Business practice group, about how deal work for emerging businesses has been affected by the pandemic, the elections and the possibility of changing antitrust rules.

Read a transcription of this episode here.

iTunes
Episode 45
COVID-19’s impact on the health care industry

COVID-19 has had an impact on virtually every industry in the country, but none more so than on health care. In this episode, Jay talks with John Carney, chair of Porter Wright’s Health Care Practice and former Ohio state representative, about the changes that COVID-19 has wrought on health care and on some changes the industry is likely to experience in the future.

iTunes

1990s to the present: The Chicago School and antitrust enforcement

There is no question that antitrust policy, at any time, is highly influenced by the prevailing economic thinking. Equally unquestionable is the fact that economic thinking is highly influenced by one’s political philosophy. With these principles established, the current debate over the purpose of the antitrust laws, and thus the standards they ought to employ, seems an inevitable conclusion to the shifting economic and political tides that have taken place over the last several decades. In this installment in our series, The antitrust revolution is coming? The antitrust revolution is here?, we discuss the continued evolution of antitrust through the 1990s and 2000s and the arguments for and against retaining “consumer welfare” as the prime or sole objective of the antitrust laws.

Continue Reading

The antitrust revolution is coming? The antitrust revolution is here?

Borrowing from the immortal words of Paul Revere, the title consciously evokes images of a battle, though fought with words and ideas and (hopefully) not muskets and bayonets. The proper objectives of the antitrust laws and the appropriate level of antitrust enforcement has been discussed in mainstream media more over the last decade than perhaps at any point in time. Indeed, in both 2016 and 2020, the Democratic Party platform included a section on antitrust. Many non-lawyers may assume that the public discussions about antitrust are nothing more than the normal discourse attendant to political jockeying. And to some extent that may be correct. But there really is a more fundamental debate going on that hit at the heart and soul of antitrust. In fact, to a very real extent, the debate about antitrust mirrors the divide in social philosophy that underlies the political schism that exists today.

Continue Reading

Antitrust as antidote? Historical overview of antitrust law

An antitrust revolution is upon us. Numerous pundits and political leaders blame many of today’s societal and economic ills on what they claim is the increasing concentration of economic power in the hands of a few. Perceived lax antitrust enforcement and permissive antitrust laws, many claim, is the cause of that. Indeed, President Joe Biden has placed antitrust enforcement at the forefront of his administration and aims to use antitrust enforcement to remedy social inequities and restore democratic ideals. Continue Reading

Supreme Court clips FTC’s wings

In a significant decision handed down last Thursday, April 22, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) cannot, in the first instance, seek monetary remedies in federal court. Rather, it must first obtain a cease and desist order and, only after a violation of that order, can it seek penalties or other monetary relief, such as disgorgement.  Read on for why this should matter to you.

Continue Reading

LexBlog