When Does Refusal to Deal Violate Antitrust Law?
Regulatory Transparency Project's Fourth Branch Video
| Topics: | Administrative Law & Regulation • Corporations, Securities & Antitrust • Intellectual Property • Regulatory Transparency Project |
|---|---|
| Sponsors: | Regulatory Transparency Project |
In 2004, the Supreme Court decided Verizon Communications v. Law Offices of Curtis V. Trinko. The case examined what types of monopolistic activities would violate antitrust laws. The Court addressed issues involving forced sharing, the risks and rewards of competition in a free market, and the role of governing regulations. The Trinko decision raises important questions and provides insightful consideration for examining antitrust issues.
Jan Rybnicek is Counsel at Freshfields Bruckhaus Deringer.
Visit the Regulatory Transparency Project's website – https://RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of its content, and connect with it on social media.
* * * * *
As always, the Federalist Society takes no position on particular legal or public policy issues; all expressions of opinion are those of the speaker.