[Antitrust] 11/25 Merger Control

 Mandatory:

Additional:

[Antitrust] 11/12 Exclusionary Practices

Mandatory reading:

Additional reading:

  • Illinois Tool Works Inc. v. Independent Ink, Inc., 547 U.S. 28 (2006).
  • Verizon Commc’n Inc. v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko LLP, 540 U.S. 398 (2004).
  • Eastman Kodak Co. v. Image Technical Services, 504 U.S. 451 (1992).
  • Jefferson Parish Hosp. Dist. No. 2 v. Hyde, 466 U.S. 2 (1984).
  • Aspen Skiing v. Aspen Highlands Skiing, 472 U. S. 585 (1985).
  • Bus. Electr. Corp. v. Sharp Electr. Corp., 485 U.S. 717 (1988).
  • FTC v. Indiana Federation of Dentists, 476 U.S. 447 (1986).
  • Northwest Wholesale Stationers, Inc. v. Pacific Stationery & Printing Co., 472 U.S. 284 (1985).
  • Fashion Originators’ Guild of America v. FTC, 312 U.S. 457 (1941).
  • Brooke Group v. Brown & Williamson Tobacco, 509 U.S. 209 (1993).
  • Tampa Elec. Co. v. Nashville Coal Co., 365 U.S. 320 (1961).
  • Christopher R. Leslie, Predatory Pricing and Recoupment, 113 Colum. L. Rev. 1695 (2013).
  • Daniel A. Crane, The Paradox of Predatory Pricing, 91 Cornell L. Rev. 1 (2005).
  • Patrick Bolton, Joseph F. Brodley & Michael H. Riordan, Predatory Pricing: Strategic Theory and Legal Policy, 88 Geo. L.J. 2239 (2000).
  • Thomas A. Lambert, Defining Unreasonably Exclusionary Conduct: The “Exclusion of a Competitive Rival” Approach, 92 N.C. L. Rev. 1175 (2014).
  • 73 Antitrust L.J. xxx, Symposium–Aspen Skiing 20 Years Later (2005).
  • Kenneth L. Glazer, Concerted Refusals to Deal Under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 70 Antitrust L.J. 1 (2002).
  • Gary Minda, The Law and Metaphor of Boycott, 41 Buff. L. Rev. 807 (1993).
  • Abbott B. Lipsky, Jr. & J. Gregory Sidak, Essential Facilities, 51 Stan. L. Rev. 1187 (1999).
  • Phillip Areeda & Donald F. Turner, Predatory Pricing and Related Practices, 88 Harv. L. Rev. 697 (1975).

[Antitrust] 10/14-11/4 Restraints of Trade

Mandatory reading:

Additional reading:

Horizontal Restraints Cases
  • F.T.C. v. Actavis, Inc., 570 U.S. 136 (2013).
  • American Needle v. National Football League, 560 U.S. 183 (2010).
  • Bell Atlantic Corp. v. Twombly, 550 U.S. 544 (2007).
  • Polygram Holding v. FTC, 416 F.3d 29 (D.C. Cir., 2005).
  • NCAA v. University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984).
  • Broadcast Music, Inc. v. CBS, 441 U.S. 1 (1979).
  • Chicago Board of Trade v. United States, 246 U.S. 231 (1918).
Vertical Restraints Cases
  • Continental T. V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc., 433 U.S. 36 (1977).
  • State Oil v. Khan, 522 U.S. 3 (1997).
  • Albrecht v. Herald Co., 390 U.S. 145 (1968).
  • Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U. S. 373 (1911).
Articles
  • David Eisenstadt, James Langenfeld, The Role of Economics in Truncated Rule of Reason Analysis, 28-SUM Antitrust 52 (2014).
  • Gregory J. Werden, Antitrust’s Rule of Reason: Only Competition Matters, 79 Antitrust L.J. 713 (2014).
  • Geoffrey D. Oliver, Of Tenors, Real Estate Brokers and Golf Clubs: A Quick Look at Truncated Rule of Reason Analysis, 24-SPG Antitrust 40 (2010).
  • Thomas M. Jorde & David J. Teece, Rule of Reason Analysis of Horizontal Arrangements: Agreements Designed to Advance Innovation and Commercialize Technology, 61 Antitrust L.J. 579 (1993).
  • Robert H. Bork, Resale Price Maintenance and Consumer Welfare, 77 Yale L. J. 950 (1968).
  • Robert Bork, The Rule of Reason and the Per Se Concept: Price Fixing and Market Division, 74 Yale L.J. 775 (1965) and 75 Yale L.J. 373 (1966).

[Antitrust] 9/23-30 Market Definition & Market Power

Mandatory reading:

Additional reading:

[lawecon] 5/20-27 Criticisms and the Behavioral Approach

Mandatory:

  • Christine Jolls, Cass R. Sunstein & Richard Thaler, A Behavioral Approach to Law and Economics, in Behavioral Law and Economics (Cass R. Sunstein ed., 2000).

Additional:

  • Margaret Jane Radin, The Colin Ruagh Thomas O’fallon Memorial Lecture on Reconsidering Personhood, 74 Or. L. Rev. 423 (1995).
  • Richard H. Thaler & Cass R. Sunstein, Nudge: Improving Decisions About Health, Wealth, and Happiness (2009).
  • Other Articles in Behavioral Law and Economics (Cass R. Sunstein, Ed., 2000).

[Antitrust] 12/16-30 Restraints of Trade

Mandatory reading:

Additional reading:

Horizontal Restraints Cases
  • F.T.C. v. Actavis, Inc., 133 S. Ct. 2223 (2013).
  • Realcomp II, Ltd. v. F.T.C., 635 F.3d 815 (6th Cir. 2011).
  • American Needle v. National Football League, 130 S. Ct. 2201 (2010).
  • Polygram Holding v. FTC, 416 F.3d 29 (D.C. Cir., 2005).
  • NCAA v. University of Oklahoma, 468 U.S. 85 (1984).
  • Broadcast Music, Inc. v. CBS, 441 U.S. 1 (1979).
  • Chicago Board of Trade v. United States, 246 U.S. 231 (1918).
Vertical Restraints Cases
  • Continental T. V., Inc. v. GTE Sylvania Inc., 433 U.S. 36 (1977).
  • State Oil v. Khan, 522 U.S. 3 (1997).
  • Albrecht v. Herald Co., 390 U.S. 145 (1968).
  • Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 U. S. 373 (1911).
Articles
  • David Eisenstadt, James Langenfeld, The Role of Economics in Truncated Rule of Reason Analysis, 28-SUM Antitrust 52 (2014).
  • Gregory J. Werden, Antitrust’s Rule of Reason: Only Competition Matters, 79 Antitrust L.J. 713 (2014).
  • Geoffrey D. Oliver, Of Tenors, Real Estate Brokers and Golf Clubs: A Quick Look at Truncated Rule of Reason Analysis, 24-SPG Antitrust 40 (2010).
  • Thomas M. Jorde & David J. Teece, Rule of Reason Analysis of Horizontal Arrangements: Agreements Designed to Advance Innovation and Commercialize Technology, 61 Antitrust L.J. 579 (1993).
  • Robert H. Bork, Resale Price Maintenance and Consumer Welfare, 77 Yale L. J. 950 (1968).
  • Robert Bork, The Rule of Reason and the Per Se Concept: Price Fixing and Market Division, 74 Yale L.J. 775 (1965) and 75 Yale L.J. 373 (1966).

[Antitrust] 12/2 Mergers & Acquisitions

 Mandatory:

Additional:

  • DOJ Non-Horizontal Merger Guidelines.
  • German Federal Cartel Office, Guidance on Substantive Merger Control (2012).
  • United States v. General Dynamics, 415 U. S. 486 (1974).
  • FTC v. Procter & Gamble Co., 386 U.S. 568 (1967).
  • Brown Shoe v. United States, 370 U.S. 294 (1962).
  • Omnicare, Inc. v. Unitedhealth Group, Inc., 629 F.3d 697 (7th Cir. 2011).
  • FTC  v. Whole Foods Market, 548 F.3d 1028 (D.C. Cir. 2008).
  • 「錢櫃/好樂迪」結合案決定書(公結字108001)。

[IPLaw] 1/2 非傳統商標

Mandatory reading:

  • Christian Louboutin S.A. v. Yves Saint Laurent America Holdings, Inc. 696 F.3d 206 (2th. Cir. 2012).

Additional reading:

  • Matal v. Tam, 137 S.Ct. 1744 (2017).
  • Qualitex Co. v. Jacobson Products Co., 514 U.S. 159, 115 S.Ct. 1300 (1995).
  • Two Pesos, Inc. v. Taco Cabana, Inc. 112 S.Ct. 2753 (1992).
  • Nextel Commc’ns, Inc. v. Motorola, Inc., 91 USPQ2d 1393 (TTAB 2009)_附件1.
  • Simba Toys GmbH & Co. KG v. EUIPO, Case C‑30/15 (2016)_附件2.
  • Shield Mark BV v Joost Kist h.o.d.n. Memex, Case C-283/01 (2003)_附件3.
  • Eden v OHIM, Case T-305/04 (2005)_附件4.
  • In re Upper Deck Co., 59 USPQ2d 1688 (TTAB 2001).
  • 經訴字第10006098910號訴願決定書.
  • 智慧財產法院105年度行商訴字第41號行政判決_附件5.