The House Report assembles a large amount of information about competition in digital markets and will be a valuable resource for those who want to understand the leading digital platforms.  It falls far short, however, of its stated objectives of examining “whether dominant firms are engaging in anticompetitive conduct” and whether existing antitrust laws “are adequate to address those issues.”  As to the former, it does not say what it means by anticompetitive conduct, often fails to examine possible exculpatory explanations of the conduct and documents it discusses, and does not address issues of efficiency and economic welfare that are central to antitrust analysis.  As to the latter, it does not discuss whether antitrust law is or might become adequate to address the issues it describes or the costs of the policy changes it recommends.

By A. Douglas Melamed1

 

I. INTRODUCTION

The so-called “House Report,” the lengthy report by the majority staff of the Antitrust Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee, assembles a large amount of interesting and often important information about competition in digital markets.  It will be a valuable resource for those who want to understand the leading digital platforms.  It is, however, a missed opportunity that falls far short of its stated objectives of examining “whether dominant firms are engaging in anticompetitive conduct” and whether existing antitrust laws “are adequ

ACCESS TO THIS ARTICLE IS RESTRICTED TO SUBSCRIBERS

Please sign in or join us
to access premium content!