In an important development for colleges and universities throughout the United States, a federal district court judge on February 1, 2018 certified a class of medical school faculty members in an antitrust suit against Duke University and the University of North Carolina. The class action suit alleges that Duke and UNC had an agreement not to permit lateral moves of faculty members between Duke and
Read More Faculty Non-Poaching Agreements Pose Significant Antitrust Risks
Consumer Review Fairness Act Codified Consumers’ Right to Complain
Introduction
Customer reviews are ubiquitous in today’s commercial environment. Whether the business is Amazon.com or the doctor’s office down the street, consumers are accustomed to rating and reviewing goods and services online and having access to reviews from other consumers to help inform their purchasing decisions. Ratings are important because consumers sometimes have limited opportunities to interact with sellers, prompting them to rely on accounts
Read More Consumer Review Fairness Act Codified Consumers’ Right to ComplainCongress Protects Negative Online Reviews
Social media sites such as Yelp and Facebook provide consumers with a platform to share their opinions about businesses that sell goods or services to the public.
While businesses rely on this kind of digital word-of-mouth to boost sales and positive brand awareness, unflattering online reviews are inevitable and have the potential to cause considerable damage.
But stopping customers from giving bad feedback, even if
Read More Congress Protects Negative Online ReviewsConsumer Review Fairness Act Prevents Companies From Stifling Negative Consumer Reviews
Introduction
Customer reviews are ubiquitous in today’s commercial environment. Whether the business is Amazon.com or the doctor’s office down the street, consumers are accustomed to rating and reviewing goods and services online and having access to reviews from other consumers to help inform their purchasing decisions. Ratings are important because consumers sometimes have limited opportunities to interact with sellers, prompting them to rely on accounts
Read More Consumer Review Fairness Act Prevents Companies From Stifling Negative Consumer ReviewsCourt Rules CFPB Unconstitutional and Finds CFPB Improperly Applied Mortgage Lending and Reinsurance Laws
In PHH Corporation v. Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, no. 15-1177 (D.C. Cir. Oct. 11, 2016), the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit recently held that the organizational structure of the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau (CFPB) is unconstitutional. The appellate court concluded that the CFPB’s structure—as an independent agency with a single director—did not contain sufficient checks to satisfy basic separation of powers
Read More Court Rules CFPB Unconstitutional and Finds CFPB Improperly Applied Mortgage Lending and Reinsurance LawsState Antitrust Law and the Constitution
In early 1978, I wrote an Op-ed piece for the New York Times describing the 1977 landmark “Chevymobile” settlement by forty-four state attorneys general with General Motors in which it was alleged that GM had failed to disclose the substitution of Chevy engines in 1977 Oldsmobiles, Buicks and Pontiacs. In my Op-ed, I had predicted that the Chevymobile matter, in which I participated as a
Read More State Antitrust Law and the ConstitutionThird Circuit Affirms FTC’s Ability to Bring Cybersecurity Enforcement Actions
On August 24th, the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit issued its decision in Federal Trade Commission v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp., affirming a 2014 district court ruling that the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) has the authority to regulate cybersecurity lapses. The Third Circuit also held that Wyndham – the global hospitality giant — had fair notice that its cybersecurity practices could
Read More Third Circuit Affirms FTC’s Ability to Bring Cybersecurity Enforcement ActionsUnilateral Price Policies in the Contact Lens Industry: Can Manufacturers Be Forced to Sell to Every Retailer?
It is a cardinal rule of antitrust that—absent very limited exceptions—parties can do business with, or refuse to do business with, whomever they choose. The Supreme Court solidified that premise in United States v. Colgate & Co.1 and has reiterated it time and again.2 Recent state legislation and lawsuits arising in the contact lens industry are threatening to dismantle that bedrock principle
Read More Unilateral Price Policies in the Contact Lens Industry: Can Manufacturers Be Forced to Sell to Every Retailer?Competition News, June 2015
Unilateral Price Policies in the Contact Lens Industry: Can Manufacturers Be Forced to Sell to Every Retailer?
It is a cardinal rule of antitrust that – absent very limited exceptions – parties can do business, or refuse to do business, with whomever they choose. The Supreme Court solidified that premise in United States v. Colgate & Co., 250 U.S. 300, 307 (1919), and has
Read More Competition News, June 2015North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC — What Hath the Supreme Court Wrought?
The federalism debate has continued to serve as a point of controversy and division in American politics and jurisprudence.1 The balance of power between the states and the federal government has shifted over time reflecting the realities of this debate. Historically, the states were thought to possess the exclusive power to regulate ‘‘their purely internal affairs” through the exercise of their police powers.2
Read More North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. FTC — What Hath the Supreme Court Wrought?