• driven by competitor complaints.
• run by politicians rather than antitrust professionals.
• conceived of as regulation, not as law enforcement.
• grounded in a skepticism of markets.
• lacks the due process of US court proceedings.
• allows for appeal, but only after modifying conduct.
• lacks the burden of proof of an adversarial system.
• does not impeach unsound theories.
• has a low bar for anticompetitive effects.
• receptive to leveraging theories.
• does not recognize competition on the merits.
Antitrust and Tech: Europe and the United States Differ, and It Matters
8 Pages Posted: 4 Sep 2019
Gregory J. Werden
unaffiliated
Luke M. Froeb
Vanderbilt University - Owen Graduate School of Management
Date Written: August 26, 2019
Abstract
European enforcers have brought high-profile antitrust cases against the tech giants, and both activists and members of Congress are calling for action in the United States. This short note identifies ten hard-wired differences between the European and American enforcement regimes that make very it difficult for the US antitrust enforcement agencies to emulate their European counterparts. This note also identifies a few other points of contrast between Europe and the United States that affect antitrust enforcement against tech giants going forward.
Keywords: tech giants, antitrust
JEL Classification: K21, L41
Suggested Citation:
Werden, Gregory J. and Froeb, Luke M., Antitrust and Tech: Europe and the United States Differ, and It Matters (August 26, 2019). Available at SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=3442798
No comments:
Post a Comment