Apple v. Pepper: When Can a Private Individual Sue for an Antitrust Violation?

January 8, 2021

In Apple v. Pepper, the Supreme Court considered whether consumers could directly sue Apple for a surcharge on apps in the iPhone App Store.

Regulation of Telehealth Services in the Era of COVID

December 22, 2020

Should telemedicine be considered as the same or different from traditional office visits, and what regulations should govern it?

Should Local Zoning Laws Become More Flexible in the Age of COVID-19?

December 14, 2020

Land use regulations have been relaxed to accommodate the COVID era, but will this flexibility remain after things finally start returning to normal?

The Debate over Worker Classification in California: CA AB-5 and Beyond

December 1, 2020

Californians approved an exemption to AB-5 permitting app-based ridesharing and delivery drivers to function as independent contractors. What about other independent contractors?

When Does Refusal to Deal Violate Antitrust Law?

November 17, 2020

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.

How Does the FDA Regulate Hand Sanitizer?

September 23, 2020

Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, hand sanitizer has been in high demand. The FDA has stringent regulations about the ingredients for hand sanitizer. This guidance was relaxed somewhat to allow more production from a variety of alcohol industries, such as fuel alcohol manufacturers. After these industries invested time and money preparing to produce hand sanitizer, the FDA revoked the initial guidance and dictated that all hand sanitizer must comply with the usual standards. Are the actions of the FDA justified out of a concern for safety, or should some regulations be re-evaluated in times of emergency?

T. Elliot Gaiser is an Associate at Boyden Gray & Associates PLLC.

When Do Low Prices Hurt Competition?

August 17, 2020

Lower prices are generally assumed to benefit consumers. However, predatory pricing – which artificially lowers prices and eliminates competition – is a bad thing for the consumer in the long run. In Brooke Group, the Supreme Court established guidelines for courts to determine when lower pricing is actually predatory pricing. In this video, Charlie Beller discusses the Brooke Group case and its impact on our digitized economy, which is increasingly dominated by free or zero-priced services.

Should Congress Close the “Streaming Loophole”?

August 4, 2020

Copyright infringement laws dictate serious penalties for digital works that have been reproduced and downloaded. However, streaming has become the new method of choice for illegal piracy. “Display and public performances” laws – which cover streaming – only carry trivial penalties. This is called the “streaming loophole.” Copyright advocates say that new laws must be passed to close the loophole, while internet freedom advocates insist that new laws could harm consumers.

Kevin Madigan is VP, Legal Policy and Copyright Counsel at the Copyright Alliance.

Washington or the States: Who Has the Authority to Regulate Commercial Drone Flights?

July 15, 2020

Commercial drone services are evolving rapidly but who regulates how and where they operate? The Federal Aviation Administration is authorized to oversee “navigable airspace.” On the other hand, drones fly low to the ground which would implicate property rights, which are governed by state laws. How might these regulatory issues be assessed and resolved, and how could they affect the future of drone technology and usage?

Brent Skorup is a Senior Research Fellow at the Mercatus Center at George Mason University.

California’s AB-5 Law: Who can be considered an “independent contractor”?

June 30, 2020

In 2019, California passed AB-5, a law that mandates that most workers should be considered “employees” rather than “independent contractors.” Advocates claim that this law will offer more protection for all workers. Opponents state that this law will stifle innovation and deprive workers of the independence to structure their own relationships.

Alida Kass of the New Jersey Civil Justice Institute explores how the California law compares to other states and the issues that it may raise for workers.