type here...

Herbert Hovenkamp

Herbert Hovenkamp is the James G. Dinan University Professor, Penn Law and the Wharton School, University of Pennsylvania. He is a Fellow of the American Academy of Arts and Sciences, and in 2008 won the Justice Department’s John Sherman Award for lifetime contributions to antitrust law. His legal history writing includes The Opening of American Law: Neoclassical Legal Thought, 1870-1970 (Oxford, 2015); Enterprise and American Law, 1836-1937 (Harvard, 1991). His principal antitrust scholarship includes Antitrust Law (with the late Phillip E. Areeda and the late Donald F. Turner, 1978-2020).
Antitrust and Competition

Google Ad Tech Delivered an Important Victory for the Government Using a Flawed Tying Rule

Herbert Hovenkamp
Herbert Hovenkamp writes that the court presiding over the Google Ad Tech case gave the government an important win. However, by relying on the per se tying rule instead of rule of reason, the court perpetuated a flawed court precedent that can preclude serious market analysis for competitive harms.
Antitrust and Competition

The Ruling Against American Airlines-JetBlue Provides a Chance To Reform Antitrust’s Rule of Reason

Herbert Hovenkamp
Herbert Hovenkamp writes that the First Court’s recent ruling against American Airlines and JetBlue for coordinating operations in New York City and Boston exemplifies the correct application of antitrust’s rule of reason, which has troubled courts and plaintiffs and led to underenforcement for decades.
Antitrust and Competition

Antitrust Policy After Biden

Herbert Hovenkamp
Herbert Hovenkamp applauds the Biden administration’s antitrust authorities for intervening in labor markets and more robustly challenging mergers between competitors. However, the next administration should clarify in its guidance that the objective of stronger antitrust enforcement must focus on lowering prices, increasing output, and removing any restraints on innovation.
Antitrust and Competition

Tech Monopoly

Herbert Hovenkamp
The following is an excerpt from Herbert Hovenkamp's new book, “Tech Monopoly,” now out at MIT Press.
Antitrust and Competition

Consumer Welfare Will Determine the Outcome of the Apple Lawsuit

Herbert Hovenkamp
At the heart of the government’s lawsuit against Apple is if the tech company’s practices of tying and refusing to deal truly enhance the performance and security of the iPhone and its ancillary services. The complaint indicates that the outcome of the case will be determined by the consumer welfare standard, writes Herbert Hovenkamp.
Antitrust and Competition

The Antitrust Agencies’ Focus on Monopolization Claims Against Big Tech Dilutes the Meaning of Monopoly

Herbert Hovenkamp
The various antitrust complaints the Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission have brought against Google, Amazon, and Facebook are based on monopolization claims under Section 2 of the Sherman Act. Herbert Hovenkamp explains why the government should also  have relied on Section 1 of the Sherman Act and Section 7 of the Clayton Act to support their Big Tech cases.
Antitrust and Competition

The Surprising Culprit Behind Declining US Antitrust Enforcement

Herbert Hovenkamp
In contrast to a recent paper that argues the decline in antitrust enforcement over recent decades is due largely to the political influence of big business, Herbert Hovenkamp argues that small businesses and trade associations have historically had more influence over antitrust policy, often lobbying for less competition and higher prices.
Antitrust and Competition

What Antitrust Experts Want You to Know About the Amazon Trial

Fiona Scott Morton
In late September, the United States Federal Trade Commission sued Amazon for using a set of anticompetitive strategies to maintain its monopoly in the online retail market. ProMarket asked four antitrust experts —two economists and two law professors —to discuss the foundations and strength of the complaint’s arguments, the history of similar cases, and the potential for a legal remedy.
Antitrust and Competition

Fixing Platform Monopoly in the Google Search Case

Herbert Hovenkamp
Google is on trial for anticompetitive behaviors designed to protect its monopoly in internet search. Herb Hovenkamp analyzes several possible remedies the presiding court and Department of Justice could pursue and suggests which ones may succeed in reinforcing competition to protect consumer interests.
Antitrust and Competition

Herbert Hovenkamp: Distinguishing Harms from Benefits in the 2023 Merger Guidelines

Herbert Hovenkamp
Herb Hovenkamp provides his round-two comments on the draft Merger Guidelines.
123Page 1 of 3

Latest news

View All

The publication of the Stigler Center at The University of Chicago Booth School of Business

ProMarket is dedicated to discussing how competition tends to be subverted by special interests. The posts represent the opinions of their writers, not necessarily those of the University of Chicago, the Booth School of Business, or its faculty. For more information, please visit ProMarket Policy.