THE ANTITRUST / CONSUMER PROTECTION PARADOX : TWO POLICIES AT WAR WITH EACH OTHER Joshua D . Wright , George Mason University School of Law
نویسندگان
چکیده
The potential complementarities between antitrust and consumer protection law— collectively, “consumer law”—are well known. The rise of the newly established Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) portends a deep rift in the intellectual infrastructure of consumer law that threatens the consumer-welfare oriented development of both bodies of law. This Feature describes the emerging paradox that rift has created: a body of consumer law at war with itself. The CFPB’s behavioral approach to consumer protection rejects revealed preference— the core economic link between consumer choice and economic welfare and the fundamental building block of the rational choice approach underlying antitrust law. This Feature analyzes the economic, legal, and political institutions underlying the potential rise of an incoherent consumer law and concludes that, unfortunately, there are several reasons to believe the intellectual rift shaping the development of antitrust and consumer protection will continue for
منابع مشابه
Antitrust (Over-?) Confidence
On October 5, 2007, a group of antitrust scholars convened on Chicago’s near northside to discuss monopolization law. In the course of their freewheeling but fascinating conversation, a number of broad themes emerged. Those themes can best be understood in contrast to a body of antitrust scholarship that was born six miles to the south, at the University of Chicago. Most notably, the northside ...
متن کاملAntitrust Law and Competition for Distribution
An unsettled area of antitrust law is the regulation of the competitive process for product distribution and promotion. Competition for distribution involves vertical contracting with respect to product placement, promotional activity, or the decision to carry a particular product. This process includes controversial practices recently subject to intense scrutiny such as slotting allowances, lo...
متن کاملWhy the Supreme Court Was Correct to Deny Certiorari in Ftc
In November 2008, the Federal Trade Commission petitioned the Supreme Court to review the D.C. Circuit’s decision in FTC v. Rambus. That decision reversed the Commission’s finding that Rambus knowingly failed to disclose a patent to a standard setting organization and, in so doing, acquired monopoly power in violation of Section 2 of the Sherman Act. In February 2009, the Supreme Court denied t...
متن کاملContracts: an Empirical Perspective
Modern legal scholars frequently and increasingly base their analyses on the assumption, grounded largely in the extensive experimental literature, that individuals are subject to a number of systematic behavioral biases. Within the legal literature, behavioral economic analysis has been relied upon to generate a significant number of proposals for paternalistic regulation. These proposals are ...
متن کامل