Re:FTC Sues Amazon for Illegally Maintaining Monopoly Power
by ameister14 on Wednesday September 27, 2023 @10:18PM
(#37684402)
>You are 40 years behind on the modern day interpretations of the anti-trust laws by the courts then . . . lower prices are almost the court decided definition of a consumer benefit.
That's not the policy of Lina Khan and the current FTC. She was literally put into the position she holds because she was critical of that framework for antitrust.
Yes, since the 70's Bork and the Chicago school has held sway in courts, but that's changing. So no, I'm not behind - this is why the FTC is bringing this case in the first place.
Re:FTC Sues Amazon for Illegally Maintaining Monopoly Power
by stale2002 on Thursday September 28, 2023 @05:35PM
(#37696212)
> Yes, since the 70's Bork and the Chicago school has held sway in courts
Oh OK, so then I am correct under the overwhelming majority position/framework which is the only interpretation that matters for enforcement, which is the interpretation held by the court system.
I am more than happy to accept that concession and only be "wrong" under the minority position that hasn't been relevant for 40 years.
You are 40 years behind on the modern day interpretations of the anti-trust laws by the courts then.
An analysis of how much consumers benefit or are harmed by certain behavior is what the courts use for most anti-trust laws.
And lower prices are almost the court decided definition of a consumer benefit.
So yes, the point stands.
Someone else was complaining about competitors being undercut, and I responded by saying that actually lower prices are good and this is what our anti-trust laws are trying to promote, not stop.