The Digital Economy

Sarah Kreps argues that elected officials should be cautious of immediately rejecting proposals for local data centers. Instead, officials should capture potential benefits and protect residents by negotiating for better terms.

The transaction fees that businesses incur using credit and debit cards cost Americans billions of dollars each year. Despite the availability of alternative, cheaper account-to-account options that cut out the middleman, Americans have been slow to move away from card payment systems due to market mechanisms that hide the true costs of card transactions to consumers, writes Eli Orbach.

Two recent court rulings on casino-hotels using a shared software to fix prices reveal the importance of information exchanges as a super plus factor: an indicator of illegal conspiracy to limit trade. Roger D. Blair and Javier D. Donna discuss how these court cases and other recent lawsuits elucidate the role of the information exchange and the two vectors that determine its strength as a plus factor: data sensitivity and a give-to-get understanding among firms that if they shared their data, competitors would do the same.

The artificial intelligence industry recently called for an antitrust exemption to coordinate self-regulation as the risks their models pose to the internet and society...

In new research, Tingting Song examines how FRAND principles typically used to discipline excessive or discriminatory terms in SEP licensing can be applied to data brokers in data licensing.

Artificial intelligence agents are beginning to interact in ways that create risks beyond individual misalignment with corporate and social expectations. As happened with global finance after the 2007 crisis, AI governance needs to begin focusing on how good agents can still produce bad systems.

Shishene Jing argues that the fair use doctrine's central question—whether a use is sufficiently transformative to avoid licensing requirements—breaks down when applied to AI. Transformativeness worked as a test because transformative uses rarely competed financially with the originals. AI training severs that relationship, as it is both the most transformative use of copyrighted material and the use best equipped to displace their markets.

Google built and maintains its AI leadership from cash, compute, and data accumulated illegally from its monopoly in internet search. Its control over internet search, advertisement, mobile phone operating systems, and cloud computing continues to give it an advantage in AI that its competitors lack. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit must consider this entrenched and vertically integrated market position when it revisits the lower court’s lax remedies, write Asad Ramzanali and Joel Thayer.

In new research, Saharsh Agarwal and Ananya Sen study how Google AI Overviews reduce traffic to content publishers, their impact on consumer experience, and the implications of these findings for platform regulation and copyright and competition law.

A remedy of “Pay for Half” that limits the share of devices for which Google can pay for default search status, as well as the share of revenue Google can pay its channel parters for that status, offers a middle ground that would help restore competition while preserving revenue for distribution partners, argue Alissa Cooper, Fiona Scott Morton, and Nick Jacobson.