The Antitrust-Telecom Connection

This Article discusses the Telecommunications Act of 1996, which requires local telephone service providers to provide certain services to competitive local exchange carriers, and its relation to the Sherman Antitrust Act. The author begins by examining the Telecommunications Act and the allegations in the telecom-antitrust cases. In these cases, some courts have held that the antitrust laws apply to local telephone companies as if the Telecommunications Act did not exist, other courts have dismissed identical antitrust claims. The author attempts to explain these conflicting results by showing court\u27s reliance on two different lines of doctrine: implied immunity and antitrust state action. The author goes on to determine the proper way to account for a competition-enhancing regulatory statute like the, Telecommunications Act, when considering an antitrust challenge. The author argues that new doctrinal tools are needed for this task because the Telecommunications Act\u27s single goal is to enhance competition, whereas most anti-trust laws seek to advance policy goals other than competition. The author concludes by applying these doctrinal tools to the Telecommunications Act

Judge Koh’s Monopolization Mania: Her Novel Antitrust Assault Against Qualcomm Is an Abuse of Antitrust Theory

I. Introduction: A Blockbuster Decision II. The Typology of Antitrust Offenses ... A. Per Se Offenses ... B. Rule of Reason Cases ... C. Per Se Legality or “No-Duty” Rules III. FTC v. Qualcomm ... A. The Complaint and the Ohlhausen Dissent ... B. The Monopolization Issue ... C. Market Definition ... D. Trinko and the Antitrust Duty to Deal ... E. Qualcomm’s Pricing Policy—The Use of Constant Rates ... F. The FTC Valuation Dilemma … G. Qualcomm Efficiency Justifications IV. Conclusio

Net Neutrality

This book is available as open access through the Bloomsbury Open Access programme and is available on www.bloomsburycollections.com. Chris Marsden maneuvers through the hype articulated by Netwrok Neutrality advocates and opponents. He offers a clear-headed analysis of the high stakes in this debate about the Internet's future, and fearlessly refutes the misinformation and misconceptions that about' Professor Rob Freiden, Penn State University Net Neutrality is a very heated and contested policy principle regarding access for content providers to the Internet end-user, and potential discrimination in that access where the end-user's ISP (or another ISP) blocks that access in part or whole. The suggestion has been that the problem can be resolved by either introducing greater competition, or closely policing conditions for vertically integrated service, such as VOIP. However, that is not the whole story, and ISPs as a whole have incentives to discriminate between content for matters such as network management of spam, to secure and maintain customer experience at current levels, and for economic benefit from new Quality of Service standards. This includes offering a ‘priority lane' on the network for premium content types such as video and voice service. The author considers market developments and policy responses in Europe and the United States, draws conclusions and proposes regulatory recommendations