Establishing Market and Monopoly Power in Tech Platform Antitrust Cases

Q2 Social Sciences Antitrust Bulletin Pub Date : 2022-01-26 DOI:10.1177/0003603X211066984
Marshall I. Steinbaum
{"title":"Establishing Market and Monopoly Power in Tech Platform Antitrust Cases","authors":"Marshall I. Steinbaum","doi":"10.1177/0003603X211066984","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In June 2021, a federal judge dismissed the Federal Trade Commission’s first monopolization complaint against Facebook on the grounds that it did not plead sufficient facts to establish that Facebook possesses monopoly power in online social networking. The ruling highlights two contentious aspects of antitrust jurisprudence: the legal necessity of establishing a defendant’s monopoly power as part of Sherman Act liability for unilateral conduct, and of establishing market power as part of liability for some forms of multi-lateral conduct, as well as the few mechanisms available to plaintiffs in both public and private enforcement to accomplish that, especially following Ohio v. American Express. This article makes two related claims: that direct evidence of market power is plentiful and should be understood as such by courts, and that exactly the direct evidence of market power that courts should consider also establishes that relevant markets on each side of tech platforms are small when properly defined, whatever defendants may say.","PeriodicalId":36832,"journal":{"name":"Antitrust Bulletin","volume":"67 1","pages":"130 - 145"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Antitrust Bulletin","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/0003603X211066984","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"Social Sciences","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

In June 2021, a federal judge dismissed the Federal Trade Commission’s first monopolization complaint against Facebook on the grounds that it did not plead sufficient facts to establish that Facebook possesses monopoly power in online social networking. The ruling highlights two contentious aspects of antitrust jurisprudence: the legal necessity of establishing a defendant’s monopoly power as part of Sherman Act liability for unilateral conduct, and of establishing market power as part of liability for some forms of multi-lateral conduct, as well as the few mechanisms available to plaintiffs in both public and private enforcement to accomplish that, especially following Ohio v. American Express. This article makes two related claims: that direct evidence of market power is plentiful and should be understood as such by courts, and that exactly the direct evidence of market power that courts should consider also establishes that relevant markets on each side of tech platforms are small when properly defined, whatever defendants may say.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
科技平台反垄断案件中市场与垄断力的确立
2021年6月,一名联邦法官驳回了联邦贸易委员会对脸书的首次垄断指控,理由是该委员会没有提供足够的事实来证明脸书在在线社交网络中拥有垄断权。该裁决强调了反垄断法中两个有争议的方面:将被告的垄断权确立为《谢尔曼法案》对单方面行为的责任的一部分的法律必要性,以及将市场权力确立为某些形式的多边行为的责任一部分的法律必要性,以及原告在公共和私人执法中为数不多的实现这一目标的机制,特别是在俄亥俄州诉美国运通案之后。这篇文章提出了两个相关的主张:市场力量的直接证据是丰富的,法院应该理解这一点,而法院应该考虑的市场力量的确切直接证据也证明,无论被告怎么说,只要定义得当,科技平台每一方的相关市场都很小。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Antitrust Bulletin
Antitrust Bulletin Social Sciences-Law
CiteScore
1.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
34
期刊最新文献
Geographic Market Definition in Commercial Health Insurer Matters: A Unified Approach for Merger Review, Monopolization Claims, and Monopsonization Claims Do EU and U.K. Antitrust “Bite”?: A Hard Look at “Soft” Enforcement and Negotiated Penalty Settlements Wall Street’s Practice of Compelling Confidentiality of Private Underwriting Fees: An Antitrust Violation? Two Challenges for Neo-Brandeisian Antitrust Epic Battles in Two-Sided Markets
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1