Internet Archive: Over 1 Million Digital Books Available to the Print-Disabled

Those books are available for free, in a format called DAISY, either open or protected. Open DAISYs can be read by anyone in the world on many different devices. Protected DAISYs can only be opened using a key issued by the Library of Congress NLS program.

Estimating the Economic Impact of Mass Digitization Projects on Copyright Holders: Evidence from the Google Book Search Litigation

Hannibal Travis, here.

Netzneutralität aus deutscher Sicht: "Wettbewerb ist Garant für Netzneutralität"

Matthias Kurth, Präsident der Bundesnetzagentur, hier.

ACTA negotiations: joint statement released

Here.

ICN Members' Market Studies

ICN Market Studies Information Store

The OFT consults on a proposal to introduce new guidance on how it conducts investigations

Read the Consultation paper.

Competition and Mergers Among Nonprofits

J.Prufer, here.

2010 US Horizontal Merger Guidelines Released

Here.

Nurturing the Accumulation of Innovations. Lessons from the Internet

Shane Greenstein, here.

Post Oracle-Sun Merger: OpenSolaris' fate revealed (and what about Oracle's public announcement)?

Here.
From the Oracle-Sun merger decision, para 182:
"Although, with the exception of points 1, 2 and 3 (see below paragraph 184), Oracle's
public announcement is not legally binding on Oracle, the Commission considers that
the strong specificities of open source software and the vibrant ecosystem surrounding
MySQL provide for a self-enforcing mechanism ensuring that Oracle would not have
the ability and incentives to deviate from its announced future conduct. Reputation and
trust is of utmost importance for the sponsor of an open source project which depends
on contributions by a large ecosystem of users, developers and customers. After the
merger Oracle will become the sponsor of a number of significant open source projects
of Sun, including Java, MySQL and OpenSolaris, and will as such need to gain and
retain the trust from the open source community. In this respect, it can be expected that
all of the public pledges made by Oracle to reassure MySQL users, developers and
storage engine vendors will be subject to close scrutiny from the open source
community."
Was the EU Commission somehow slightly too optimistic?

Oracle v. Google

See this post by Groklaw. See also this, on en.swpat.org and this from techrights.org. More from zdnet.de. Here also about Google's first reaction. More from FAZ.net. Reactions from  German Java users' groups.

Auf der Suche nach dem Patentrezept

U.Froitzheim, here.

Innovate, Yes, but Make It Practical

NYT, here.

Behavioral Economics: Observations Regarding Issues That Lie Ahead

J.Thomas Rosch, here.

Software Patents Post Bilski: A Look Ahead

Michael A. Spiegel, here.

Online markets: discussion paper

A report for the Office of Fair Trading, Phillipa Marks, Stephen Adshead and Brian Williamson of Plum Consulting, Yali Sassoon of Keplar LLP and Ian Jewitt

Is the European Commission joining the FTC probe into whether Apple's business practices harm competition?

Read this from the New York Post.

Methodologische Grundlagen einer Evaluation von Wettbewerbspolitik,

Kai Hüschelrath, here.

Spiegel: Explosion des Wissens

Hat Deutschland im 19. Jahrhundert einen industriellen Aufstieg erlebt, weil das Land kein Urheberrecht kannte? Hier (Deutsch) and here (English)

Access to Knowledge in Africa: The Role of Copyright

C Armstrong, J De Beer, D Kawooya, A Prabhala, T Schonwetter, here. 

Final report of the 14th session of the Intergovernmental Committee on the Universal Copyright Convention

Here.

Unilateral Refusals to Deal in Intellectual and Other Property

Howard Shelanski, here

On incentives to engage in designing around patents and standards for triggering a summary contempt proceeding

FTC Amicus Brief in U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Matter of TiVo, Inc., vs. EchoStar Corporation (Commissioners William E. Kovacic and Edith Ramirez dissenting)

Transcript of DOJ's Varney's Keynote Address to AAI Annual Conference

Here.

More Competition in the Computer Chip Industry? FTC-Intel Settlement

Press release, Decision and Order,  Analysis of Proposed Consent Order.

Unsurprisingly: Google-Chefjurist Arnd Haller gegen ein Leistungsschutzrecht für Presseverleger

Here.

UK Ofcom asks the Competition Commission to investigate concerns regarding the sale and distribution of subscription premium Pay TV movies

Ofcom press release and Reference Decision

Optimal Antitrust Enforcement, Dynamic Competition, and Changing Economic Conditions

Keith N. Hylton, Haizhen Lin, here

Some Optimism About Fair Use and Copyright Law

Michael J. Madison, here.

The Case for Rebalancing Antitrust and Regulation

Howard Shelanski, here

Anticompetitive e-book deals with Amazon and Apple?

The Connecticut Attorney General investigates.

Voluntary Competition Compliance Code launched in Pakistan

Downloadable from the Competition Commission's website.

Restoring competition in herbicides: FTC and Canadian Competition Bureau's divestment entente

FTC Press Release, 28/07/10,  Competition Bureau Press Release, 28/07/10

Jail time in the US for participating in global price fixing of TFT-LCD panels,

Department of Justice Press Release, 28/07/10

Collective Antitrust Damages Actions in the EU: The Opt-In v. The Opt-Out Model

Charlotte Leskinen, here.

Bilski Guidance?

USPTO's Interim Guidance for Determining Subject Matter Eligibility for Process Claims in view of Bilski v. Kappos.

AdWords: French Competition Authority

Interim measures' decision and Google's proposed commitments.

The Proposed Google Books Settlement: Copyright, Rule 23, and DOJ Section 2 Enforcement

Gregory K. Leonard, here.

Assessing the Economic Impact of Competition

Overseas Development Institute, here.

Consumer benefits from the OFT's work

Here.

Librarian of Congress: New DMCA Rules on Anti-Circumvention Exceptions

Here and here. See also LCA's press release and Groklaw's coverage. Another interesting comment from Opensource.com. The EFF expresses also clear satisfaction.

On the causes for the enforcement problems in merger control and possible solutions

An Institutional Analysis of the Enforcement Problems in Merger Control, Oliver Budzinski

Non-Price Considerations in Merger Policy

Some very inspiring insights by FTC Commissioner J. Thomas Rosch, "The Next Challenges for Antitrust Economists." See also D.S. Tucker, "Seventeen Years Later: Thoughts on Revising the Horizontal Merger Guidelines"

Technology and competition, Contributions in honour of Hanns Ullrich

Technology and competition - Technologie et concurrence. Contributions in honour of / Mélanges en l'honneur de Hanns Ullrich - Laurence Boy, Reto M. Hilty, Josef Drexl, Christine Godt, , Bernard Remiche, Editeur : Larcier, ISBN : 978-2-8044-3521-9, 746 pages

My book review (to be published in Revue Internationale de Droit Economique, 2010/2). 

"On ne doute pas que les lecteurs découvriront avec beaucoup de plaisir et d’intérêt le liber amicorum Technology and Competition – Technologie et concurrence, dédié avec admiration et affection à Hanns Ullrich, rédacteur en chef de cette revue,  Professeur au Collège d’Europe, Professeur émérite à l’Université de Munich et à l’Institut Européen de Florence, par des amis, des collègues et des anciens élèves à l’occasion de son 70ème anniversaire. Apparu sous la direction de Josef Drexl, Reto M. Hilty, Laurence Boy, Christine Godt et Bernard Remiche, cet ouvrage riche et passionnant rend un hommage sincère à cet éminent juriste au rayonnement européen et plus vaste encore.

Au cœur de la réflexion scientifique de Hanns Ullrich figurent la promotion du progrès technologique et la sauvegarde de la libre concurrence, deux enjeux juridiques et économiques majeurs annoncés par le titre même des Mélanges qui viennent de lui être offerts. Généralement, c’est le système de propriété intellectuelle, et plus particulièrement de propriété industrielle, qui est censé promouvoir le progrès technologique. La tâche de protéger le jeux de la concurrence dans toutes ces dimensions revient en revanche au droit de la concurrence. Toutefois, comme l’a rappelé dernièrement Hanns Ullrich dans les pages de cette revue, les deux corps de droit sont loin d’être parfaitement indépendants l’un de l’autre. Bien au contraire, l’octroi de droits exclusifs de propriété intellectuelle se doit d’être reconnu et éclairé avant tout par son intégration dans l’ordre concurrentiel de marché.  Il n’est donc pas surprenant que le droit de la concurrence soit régulièrement appelé au secours, dans le but de corriger une insuffisance éventuelle du fonctionnement du système de protection de la propriété intellectuelle, surtout de « surprotection » allégée. Cependant c’est avant tout en formulant des limites intrinsèques à la protection qui soient efficaces et appropriés que le système de propriété intellectuelle est censé assurer sa fonctionnalité et songer à son acceptation.

De toute évidence, la tâche qui revient au droit de la propriété intellectuelle n’est pas facile à accomplir, comme en témoignent plusieurs des contributions rassemblées dans la première partie de l’ouvrage, intitulée «Trop de protection de la propriété intellectuelle?».  Pour ce qui est par exemple du droit des brevets, face à un élargissement excessif de la définition d’invention brevetable, on aurait délaissé l’intérêt général au maintien du domaine public du savoir, c'est-à-dire de la source principale de nouvelles connaissances protégeables et non protégeables. Il en serait pas moins inquiétant pour les critères d’exception à la protection, trop souvent conçus d’une façon insuffisante et interprétés trop rigidement  pour pouvoir offrir un remède efficace aux risques de « surprotection ». Par ailleurs, ainsi que la jurisprudence communautaire en matière de droit des marques l’a maintes fois accompli en s’appuyant sur le concept de « concurrence non faussée », dans plusieurs cas il suffirait probablement d’interpréter et d’appliquer le droit de la propriété intellectuelle dans une véritable perspective de libre concurrence. Mais il est aussi indéniable que depuis quelques années, comme soulignent  plusieurs contributions, les technologies et de leurs besoins de protection changent plus rapidement que dans le passé et qu’il y a eu une transformation non négligeable des modes d’exploitation des droits de la propriété intellectuelles, il suffit de penser à la commercialisation de l’invention en tant que telle et à la exploitation sous forme immatérielle des œuvres protégés, par exemple les programmes d’ordinateurs. En outre, des nouveaux modèles économiques d’innovation ont émergé, voir par exemple le mouvement open source dans l’industrie de l’informatique. Par conséquent, le législateur pourrait être appelé à corriger les déficits systématiques de protection par modification de la réglementation-cadre avec plus de fréquence, mais aussi peut-être moins d’assurance, qu’auparavant.

Les contributions de la deuxième partie, intitulée « Protéger la concurrence », s’accordent pour souligner que le droit de la concurrence non plus n’est épargné par profondes mutations et tensions. D’une part, on assiste à une convergence assez poussée entre régimes nationaux de concurrence au sein de la Communauté Européenne, même si des différences, parfois « regrettables », résistent, par exemple le maintien, si ce n’est accentuation, du caractère politique du contrôle des opérations de concentration en France. De l’autre, on peut douter que l’approche dite  « plus économique » du droit de la concurrence, affichée depuis plus d’une décennie par la Commission européenne,  ait véritablement amené à une analyse des pratiques restrictives plus cohérente, rigoureuse et efficace. Ce qui est évident, en revanche, c’est que la nouvelle approche a servi parfois à légitimer une démarche « pro-active » de politique industrielle en vue d’objectifs préétablis. Or, il n’est pas surprenant de remarquer que parmi les amis et collègues de Hanns Ullrich plusieurs seraient favorables à une renaissance du concept de la « liberté de concurrence », si cher à la doctrine économique dynamique allemande et à l’école autrichienne.

La rencontre annoncée entre droit de la propriété intellectuelle et droit de la concurrence a enfin lieu dans la troisième partie de l’ouvrage (« Propriété intellectuelle et droit de la concurrence »). Traditionnellement, la politique communautaire de la concurrence s’est beaucoup intéressée aux pratiques d’exploitation par contrat des droits de propriété intellectuelle.  Mais c’est surtout l’analyse de l’exercice unilatéral de ces droits au service de la position dominante, notamment pour la défendre ou pour la renforcer, en particulier par des pratiques d’éviction du marché, qui est très controversée de nos jours.  Relativement sous-développée au contraire est l’analyse des enjeux que pose la propriété intellectuelle au contrôle des opérations de concentration. Les contributions réunies dans cette partie de l’ouvrage, s’attachant donc directement au rapport entre droit de la propriété intellectuelles et droit de la concurrence, offrent des éclairages très utiles sur des questions clés, à la fois juridiques et économiques. Or, il se peut que sur ces thèmes les insuffisances de l’approche économique actuelle, enracinée comme elle l’est dans la pensée économique néoclassique, se fassent davantage ressentir, comme on le montre très justement dans l’étude dédié aux restrictions au commerce parallèle des produits pharmaceutiques.

Le miroir scientifique de Hanns Ullrich qui sont ces Mélanges, n’auraient pas pu s’achever sans une partie consacrée au « Droit International », autre thème sur lequel s’est penché ce savant aux talents et aux intérêts multiples. La « protéiforme » mondialisation des pratiques commerciales, comme le savent très bien les lecteurs de cette revue, présente des enjeux aussi difficiles que cruciaux. Les contributions ici regroupées, tout en témoignant de cette complexité, invitent à se ressourcer à la dimension intimement éthique de toute réflexion juridique engagée, ce qui n’est pas le moindre mérite de l’ouvrage".

The UK Competition Commission has published its Annual Report

Here.

Copyright law's impact on teaching and research in the digital age: a survey from the UK

Driving UK Research – Is copyright a help or a hindrance?,  a new report from the research community, compiled by the British Library

IP and refusal to deal: balancing consumer interests

Intellectual Property and Refusal to Deal: 'Ad Hoc' v. 'Categorical' Balancing, Francesco Denozza

Consumer choice approach to competition law

Consumer Choice as the Best Way to Recenter the Mission of Competition Law, Robert H. Lande

ACTA: Privacy Implications

Concerns expressed by the EU Article 29 Data Protection Working Party

Changes in Competition Policy over the Last Two Decades, 2010

20th anniversary of the Polish Office of Competition and Consumer Protection, an impressive work.

Settlement In DRAM Case

From the Maryland Attorney General press release: “The settlement provides restitution for consumers and state and local government agencies who paid more for computers and other electronic devices because of the price-fixing scheme.”

Viacom v Google on the Interpretation of DMCA "safe harbor" provision

Here. As the U.S. District Judge Louis Stanton put it, "the critical question is whether the statutory phrases “actual knowledge that the material or an activity using the material on the system or network is infringing,” and “facts or circumstances from which infringing activity is apparent” in § 512(c)(1)(A)(i) and (ii) mean a general awareness that there
are infringements (here, claimed to be widespread and common), or rather mean actual or constructive knowledge of specific and identifiable infringements of individual items".
According to the judge, "if a service provider knows (from notice from the owner, or a “red flag”) of specific instances of infringement, the provider must promptly remove the infringing material. If not, the burden is on the owner to identify the infringement. General knowledge that infringement is “ubiquitous” does not impose a duty on the service provider to monitor or search its service for infringements."

Entflechtungen von Unternehmen als Instrument des allgemeinen Wettbewerbsrechts?

Zum Referentenentwurf eines Gesetzes zur Einführung einer Entflechtungsbefugnis vom 8. Januar 2010, Andreas Klees / Sebastian Max Hauser

Sobre la disuasión de conductas anti-competitivas

Massimo Motta, aqui.

Aplicación de las normas de competencia al sector agroalimentario

Informe de Comisión Nacional de la Competencia hecho publico. 

Competition and agriculture: potential competition concerns with respect to the breeding and commercialisation of sunflower seeds and sunflower seed treatment products in Europe?

The European Commission opens an in-depth investigation under the EU Merger Regulation into the proposed acquisition of the global sunflower seed business of US company Monsanto by Syngenta of Switzerland.

WIPO SSCR/20: More on Limitations and Exceptions

WIPO's Second Analytical Document on Limitations and Exceptions. See US' Draft Consensus Instrument on needs of persons with print disabilities. See also EU's Draft Joint Recommendation concerning the improved access to works protected by copyright for persons with a print disability.
US' declaration at SSCR/20: need to keep an holistic approach on L&E; need to move forward swiftly. US' draft consensus instrument as initial step.
In the meanwhile, the US distributed a Background Paper and FAQs (submitted as an information document) on the proposed consensus instrument.
See a comparison of the four proposals presently being discussed (limited to aspects concerning persons with disabilities, the "African Proposal" covers further matters). The wording of the Conclusions was so  controversial, that no agreement could be reached. As the WIPO bravely puts it, "(D)uring a late night discussion, agreed language for final conclusions proved elusive. Member states had divergent views on the wording for future work on the scope of an international instrument relating to exceptions and limitations, and on whether and when informal consultations should take place on the protection of broadcasting organizations. Discussion on all these issues will continue at the next session of the SCCR from November 8 to 12, 2010."

Berliner Rede zum Urheberrecht

Rede der Bundesministerin der Justiz Sabine Leutheusser-Schnarrenberger. Mehr zum geplanten Leistungsschutzrecht für Verlage

FTC: Is There Life After Trinko and Credit Suisse? The Role of Antitrust in Regulated Industries

Here.

How the Federal Trade Commission Works to Promote Competition and Benefit Consumers in a Dynamic Economy

Prepared Statement of the Federal Trade Commission before the United States Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer Rights

WIPO SCCR/20: Draft Treaty on Exceptions and Limitations Proposed by the African Group

Draft WIPO Treaty on Exceptions and Limitations for the Disabled, Educational and Research Institutions, Libraries and Archive Centers

UNESCO on Fighting Piracy with Non-Legislative Measures

PIRACY: CURRENT TRENDS AND NON-LEGISLATIVE MEASURES TO
COUNTERACT IT, Luis Villarroel (Corporacion Innovarte).

South Africa: Beyond Competition on the Pitch

"Unleashing Rivalry” 10 Years of enforcement by the South African competition authorities (1999-2009)

Toward An International Dialogue on the Institutional Side of Antitrust

Here, P.J.Weiser

Kartellrechtliche Schadensersatzansprüche: Strategische Überlegungen

Strategische Überlegungen bei der gerichtlichen Durchsetzung von kartellrechtlichen Schadensersatzansprüchen, T. Schreiber.

The “More Economic Approach” after 10 Years: Remarks by an Economist

Here, Justus Haucap.

Recent Developments in EU Merger Control

Here, Nadia Calviño ( Deputy Director General DG Competition, European Commission)

WIPO's scoping study on the public domain

Here.

On the anticompetitive use of the DMCA

ANTI-CIRCUMVENTION OF COMPETITION: AVOIDING CONFLICT BETWEEN THE DMCA AND ANTITRUST, J. Schroeder; see also Antitrust Law - A Stranger in the Wikinomics World? Regulating Anti-Competitive Use of the DRM/DMCA Regime, Rachel Aridor-Hershkovitz

More on Behavioral Antitrust

Behavioral Antitrust and Merger Control, G. J. Werden, L.Froeb, M.Shor.

EGEDA: tarifas abusivas en concepto del derecho exclusivo de autorizar la comunicación pública?

La Dirección de Investigación de la Comisión Nacional de la Competencia (CNC), ha acordado la apertura de un expediente sancionador.

Joaquin Almunia on "New Transatlantic Trends in Competition Policy"

Here.

New Zealand's Divestment Remedies Guidelines

Here.

Three-Strike in practice

UK Ofcom, Online Infringement of Copyright and the Digital Economy Act 2010: Draft Initial Obligations Code

Proposed Horizontal Merger Guidelines: "Some" Economists' Comment

Here, see also the list of all the comments received so far. Interestingly, also the Russian Competition Authority decided to express its view. 

The European Commission's 2009 Report on Competition Policy is out.

Here.

Google/AdMob: AAI'S Analysis

Here.

Tenth year anniversary of the International Competition Policy Advisory Committee (ICPAC) Report

Brown Bag Teleconference, ICPAC at Ten and the ICN, ABA.

On the Economics of Copyright

The Economics of Copyright and Digitisation: A Report on the Literature and the Need for Further Research, C. Handke.

What motivates businesses to comply with competition law?

Some possible answers: Drivers of Compliance and Non-compliance with Competition Law, OFT.

Bid rigging in the UK construction industry: assessment of the impact of OFT's recent investigation

Evaluation of the impact of the OFT's investigation into bid rigging in the construction industry, Europe Economics.

Predatory models of selective price cuts: the Italian aerated autoclaved concrete case commented

Anticompetitive vs Competitive Explanations of Unilateral Practices: the Identification Problem, Michele Polo

AAI on the US Proposed Horizontal Merger Guidelines

AAI Submits Comments to FTC and DOJ on Proposed Horizontal Merger Guidelines, Robert Lande.

A retrospective study on a non-consummated merger: FTC v. H.J. Heinz Co. and Milnot Holding Corporation

The Evolution of the Baby Food Industry 2000-2008, Viola Chen

Consumer Harm, Consumer Choice and Innovation

Real Knowledge is to Know the Extent of One's Own Ignorance: On the Consumer Harm Approach in Innovation-Related Competition Cases, Josef Drexl

Swedish Competition Authority: Ex-Post Agency Effectiveness Evaluation

Ex-post evaluations initiated by the Swedish Competition Authority,

Dan Sjöblom and Arvid Fredenberg. See also London Economics' Evaluation of OFT Competition Advocacy

ICN 2010: the Executive Summary is out

Here.

Orange/Sunrise: Rekurs zurückgezogen

S. NZZ Online: Orange und Sunrise lassen Fusion definitiv fallen

Trento's "Festival of Economics"

This year's topic: "Information, Choices and Development".

My personal choice from the extremely rich programme: M. Boldrin and D.K.Levine,

Against intellectual monopoly

Harm Quantification in Damages Actions: On the Three-Step Procedure in the German Cement Case

Quantification of Harm in Damages Actions for Antitrust Infringements: Insights from German Cartel Cases, H.W. Friederiszick, L.-H. Röller

Canadian Copyright Modernization Act (or Bill C-32) introduced

Here.

WIPO Gold: one-stop gateway to the organization’s global collections of searchable IP data

Here.

Remedies in the EU Microsoft Case

A CRITICAL APPRAISAL OF REMEDIES IN THE E.U. MICROSOFT CASES, Nicholas Economides, Ioannis Lianos.

WIPO SCCR/19: the draft report is out

Here. Looking ahead for SCCR/20. Read also Key's post on WIPO SCCR open ended consultation on the treaty for the blind

Reflecting on the best antitrust regime: a view from the US

Rewriting History: Antitrust Not As We Know It . . . Yet, J. Thomas Rosch

Commissioner, Federal Trade Commission.

Almunia on the future of public services

The role of public services in “Europe 2020”, Madrid, 31 May 2010.

Apple's App Store and GPL

The Free Software Foundation was alleging non-compliance with sec. 6 GPL v.2. Apple reacted by removing the product from its store.

Fusion untersagt: Magna/Karmann (Cabriodach-Hersteller)

Pressemitteilung und Beschluss des Bundeskartellamtes.

Revised competition rules for motor vehicle distribution and repair in the EU

Commission Regulation (EU) 461/2010 on the application of Article 101(3) of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union to categories of vertical agreements and concerted practices in the motor vehicle sector. See also the press release.

On the United/Continental Airlines Merger

The United/Continental Airlines Merger: How Will Consumers Fare?, Darren Bush, before the

US Senate Judiciary Committee, Subcommmittee on Antitrust, Competition Policy and Consumer

Rights.

Discussing the Goals of Competition Law

The 5th ASCOLA Conference “Goals of Competition Law”, May 27-29, 2010

Rheinische Friedrich-Wilhelms-Universität Bonn

Bonn, Germany.

Open Access in Italy

Report 2009, Paola Gargiulo, Maria Cassella.

OFT's Market Study on Behavioural Advertising and Consumer Protection

Online Targeting of Advertising and Prices.

Sport Leagues: Single Entity Defence in Antitrust Revisited

US Supreme Court, American Needle, Inc. v. National Football League. See also AAI's Amicus Curiae.

Google AdMob Deal: FTC Closes its Investigation

Read Press Release and Statement. See also AAI's first reaction.

Competition and regulatory objectives in the framework of the financial crisis

Financial Crisis Remedies in the European Union: Balancing Competition and Regulation in the Conditionality of Bailout Plans, Damien Gerard.

On Competition Authorities and National Regulators

The Relationship between Competition Authorities and Sectoral Regulators: An International-Comparative Perspective, Maher Dabban

Intellectual Property Regimes in a Global Context

Winston Tabb (convener), Nancy Weiss and Michael Geist, Proceedings of the 156th Association of Research Libraries Membership Meeting.

WIPO: On-line Forum on Access to Copyrighted Works by Visually Impaired

Here. See also WIPO's announcement.

Joaquin Almunia on the first European Commission Cartel Settlement

Read the transcript of his (short) speech. See also OECD, EXPERIENCE WITH DIRECT SETTLEMENTS IN CARTEL CASES, 2009.

Bulgarian Competition Authority (Комисия за защита на конкуренцията - КЗК): independence at risk?

Read this from EurActiv.

On Banks and Competition Policy

St Gallen International Competition Forum, ‘Too big to fail, but not too big to be unbundled’, Peter Freeman, UK Competition Commission's Chairman.

A Digital Agenda for Europe

See the Communication.

Jane Ginsburg on Mandatory Copyright Formalities

The U.S. Experience with Mandatory Copyright Formalities: A Love/Hate Relationship, 33 Columbia Journal of Law and the Arts 311 (2010), p. 311.

DRAM producers fined € 331 million for price cartel

Press release. It is also the first settlement decision adopted by the European Commission according to Articles 7 and 23 of Regulation 1/2003 (Q&A) .

Filmmakers and the use of fair dealing in Canada

See the new guide released by the Documentary Organization of Canada.

Strategies for opening up content

See this special issue of Research Library Issues (RLI), Association of Research Libraries.

Italian Google Competition Case: Undertakings Made Public

Here.

On Behavioral Economics and Antitrust

Behavioral Antitrust, A. P. Reeves, M. E. Stucke. See also OFT's  What does Behavioural Economics mean for Competition Policy?

Google/AdMob: diminishing competition in the market for advertising on mobile phones?

S. this article from the NYT.

Fotos in Personensuchmaschinen

OLG Köln, Urteil v. 09.02.2010, Az. 15 U 107/09.

On E-Books, Copyright and DRM

S. Sara Bannerman's post.

DRM in motion

A motion infographic project about Digital Rights Management (DRM), Vancouver Film School.

EPO on computer-implemented inventions

Opinion of the Enlarged Board of Appeal of 12 May 2010, European Patent Office (here some background info; see also the amicus curiae brief of the Foundation for a Free Information Infrastructure). See here the list of all amicus curiae briefs.

Mario Monti: défendre le marché unique et la concurrence

Voir Le Monde, 10.05. 10.

India-EU Broad-based Trade and Investment Agreement - IPR Chapter

S. the Preliminary Consultation Draft reflecting interesting divergences.

On the concept of ‘fair compensation’ in the InfoSoc directive

Advocate General’s Opinion in Case C-467/08 Sociedad General de Autores y Editores (SGAE) v PADAWAN S.L., from the press release: "Where a Member State, such as Spain, opts for a system of compensation in the form of a levy on digital reproduction equipment, devices and media, such a charge can be regarded as a compensation scheme for private copying which is compatible with the directive only where it may be presumed that those equipment, devices and media are to be used for making private copies. Remuneration which is granted to rightholders as a result of the indiscriminate application of such a levy to undertakings and professional persons, who from experience purchase digital reproduction devices and media for purposes other than private use, is not ‘fair compensation’ within the meaning of the directive".

Some highlights from the WIPO Symposium on Intellectual Property and Competition Policy

The program has slightly changed because Ricardo Machado Ruiz, Commissioner, Administrative Council for Economic Defense (CADE), Ministry of Justice, Brasilia could not attend (volcanic ash).

Some very subjective, sketchy notes (parts in blue are my forthright adds):

WIPO:
- trying to bring together two communities (ipr experts/competition experts; national competition authorities/national ip offices)
- ipr-competition not antagonistic
- well-balanced ip also very important

- WIPO's mandate to work on the interface ip/competition stemming from the Development Agenda in particular, Recommendations 7 23 and 32 (briefly: technical cooperation on the interface between iprs and competition policies; promote pro-competitive ip licensing practices; exchange of national and regional experiences and info, see also document CDIP4_CDIP/4/4 Rev. - Project on Intellectual Property and Competition Policy).
-- outcome envisaged: no formal conclusions or recommendations
-- new division on ip/competition established
-- technical assistance (already requested by Syria)
- iprs are not monopolies, they are not a "necessary evil" but, and foremostly, a differentiation/identification tool (i.e. not only about creations and inventions)
-- insofar, at the very core of competition and rivarly,

- iprs inherently procompetitive, but only in the right dosage (inter alia, Magill based on a "wrong" copyright)
-- not easy; necessary trials and errors, institutional/legal experiments, picking out the efficient solutions
- difference between an abuse of ip that results into anticompetitive effects and another which does not (reference to a case concerning a patent for irradiating food stuff increasing its vitamin c content and the legal issues thereof involving the important principle of access to health)

- interoperability ip/comp.

WTO:

- very supportive of WIPO's project
- TRIPs allows for a certain freedom in this area, but countries very often are not using it
-- but TRIPs leaves some questions unanswered (e.g., evaluative standards to anticompetitivess)
-- WIPO, WTO, OECD should provide some more help in this respect
-- collective guidelines could be helpful, based on enforcement experience, study and reflection

- ipr/comp interwoven
-- well designed ip systems already address (most) competition concerns internally (i.e., patentability criteria)
- TRIPs, articles 40, 31, 31.k, 8.2
-- art. 40.2 permissive rather than prescriptive (list non-exhaustive)
-- art. 31 (compulsory licences)
--- detailed conditions
--- protecting the legitimate interest of the right holder
-- art. 31.k (competition policy "shortcut"): "...use is permitted to remedy a practice determined after judicial or administrative process to be anti-competitive"
--- unanswered question:decision taken by the head of a national competition authority is an "administrative process"?

- but compulsory licences not always the appropriate remedy
- clash of remedies possible
-- e.g. Microsoft
--- compulsory licence in the EU, "leak" across other jurisdictions
---- before deciding on remedies, possible repercussions should be carefully investigated

- Problems
-- clusters of blocking patents
-- standards-reinforced patents
-- gene patents
-- grantbacks, but depending on circumstances

- overtime convergence on some issues not easy but possible (globalized world - risk of spillover effects)
-- conflicts likely to be increasingly significant, also at the remedies level
--- NCAs likely to oppose "hard" convergence

UNCTAD:
- Recommendation 40 ("To request WIPO to intensify its cooperation on IP related issues with United Nations agencies, according to Member States’ orientation, in particular UNCTAD, UNEP, WHO, UNIDO, UNESCO and other relevant international organizations, especially the WTO in order to strengthen the coordination for maximum efficiency in undertaking development programs")
- Development Agenda as a major event at the WIPO
- in the 80's only 20 national competition authorities (from now on: NCAs), now more than 100 (many in developing countries)
- Competition Law and Policy (Programme)
-- background papers to Intergovernmental Expert Meetings
--- COMPETITION POLICY AND THE EXERCISE OF INTELLECTUAL PROPERTY RIGHTS (TD/B/COM.2/CLP/22/Rev.1)
-- technical assistance on demand
-- Peer Review on competition legislation(voluntary)
--- "model" advise on provisions impacting iprs
---- complementarity iprs/competition
---- different tools
---- exclusivities to stimulate innovation,
----- in case of market power, not prohibited per-se, but they could have anticompetitive effects

-- Model Law on Competition (2007)
--- Chapter II, II (a) Scope of application: "goods, services or intellectual property"

- IP field
-- UNCTAD's mandates in this field
--- Accra Accord
--- Rec. 40 Development Agenda (above)
--- WHO's Global Strategy and plan of action on public health, innovation and intellectual property (2008)

-- "wider" lense, not only violations of competition provisions
--- foster generic competition immediately after patent's expiry
--- create a competitive environment for generics

OECD:
- iprs and competition not conflicting
- good competition policy, well run and designed provides for incentives to innovate
-- short-term not always central
- patent system to be procompetitive
-- room for disruptive innovation
-- role of venture capitalists
- both ip system and effective competition ideally provide for innovations
-- but iprs used in defensive (patent portfolio and patent deals) and strategic way

--- competition policy should not "destroy" the value of iprs, but the relationship can at times be complicated
- IF too easy to obtain and enforce, high penalties
-- from a societal point of view, the same level of innovation could be obtained giving less away
-- very expensive for other firms
-- entry barriers high
-- R&D deterred
- IF ipr too difficult to obtain, penalties toothless
-- incentives inefficiently low
--- not worth to invest
-- complex design of secrecy
--- disclosure and diffusion insufficient from a societal perspective (forcep's example: invention non patented and kept secret)

- IF competition policy too strong
-- iprs targeted because of their success
-- too low incentives, no licensing agreements

- IF competition policy too weak
-- licensing as masquerade for cartels
-- standard organizations ambushed

- balanced approach: a tough policy question, to be answered in a real world setting
-- patent surge, not only because of increased innovation
--- harm to competition?
--- innovation stifled?
-- courts, NCAs to "rebalance" this?
--- expertise needed to do this very high in the face of limited resources available
---- delays, risk of slowing down innovation (overkill)
-- Ip law needs fixing
--- some improvements, grant rates are coming down
- Actions
-- dialogue with patent agencies
-- OECD's role
--- reports
--- seminars, hearings, fora (see 2010 Global Forum on Competition)

- Some selected topics
-- licensing arrangements
--- most of them at least neutral from a comp policy perspective - technology transfer
--- grantbacks
---- positive: risk sharing, financing
---- negative: possibly in case of exclusive, severable improvements (follow-on innovations deterred)
-- patent pools
--- usually at least neutral
--- positive: complementary, essential iprs
--- negative: possibly when substitute iprs
---- market sharing; cover up for price agreements
---- foreclosure of third parties' technologies

- areas of controversy
-- "naked" unilateral refusal to license ip (not refusal + like in mergers)
--- OECD members: diverging answers
---- EU, compulsory licence as remedy
---- US, different philosophy
---- most members
----- compulsory licences generally not suitable
----- ip system not always effective
------- but importance of "working around" granted iprs
-- NCA stating licensing terms (e.g. fees) possibly acting as regulator and not as arbiter.

- "Convergence" very difficult at the global level, more likely are regional patches

US Dep. of Justice, Antitrust Division
- complex issue
- technological innovations as primary driver of economic growth
- distinction between invention and innovation (inno a longer process)
- complementarity
- ip questions everywhere (enforcement, advocacy, business review letters)
-- within merger proceedings particularly difficult
- tools available
-- prior cases
-- guidelines
-- 2007 Report, Antitrust Enforcement and Intellectual Property Rights: Promoting Innovation and Competition, etc.
- coming next: joint public workshop (DoJ, FTC, US PTO) to Explore the Intersection of Patent Policy and Competition Policy and its Implications for Promoting Innovation
Evolution in the way of thinking about the interface ip/comp
- 70's patents often considered monopolies, licensing stifled
- 80's rule of reason, licensing seen positively as long as different factors of production are combined (other issue: transaction costs, prod costs, free riding)
- 1995 Guidelines
-- no special rules for iprs
-- patents not presumption of market power (Supreme Court agrees in 1996)
-- market power not enough
-- benefits of licensing
--- combination of productive assets
-- focus on certain restraints
-- counterfactual licensing analysis
--- potential comp
--- likely to decrease comp
--- reduction of incentives to innovate
---- but: much less practice sofar with socalled dynamic efficiencies (theoretical challenge)
-- per se area

- 2007 Guidelines
- international convergence on the basis of an increasingly common economic approach

EU Commission, DGCom
- ipr/comp: no real conflict, both promoting innovation
-- open markets a very good incentive for innovation
-- competition policy as an element of a broader legal framework for innovation
--- a market that rewards present innovation without stifling future innovation

- innovation can be very risky,

-- but differences according to the markets under consideration

--- patent, less important in software business (seen often by market participants as obstacles to

- strategic use of patents increased

--pharma sector

--- strategic, possibly anticompetitive

- "probabilistic patents", Shapiro (and Lemley)

-- patents as lottery tickets

- patent reform could take care of it ?

- standards setting

-- benefits, interoperability, etc

-- but risks of abuse of market power

--- de facto, formal

- Microsoft Europe

-- withholding the interoperability info (not an ip case as such: patents covering interoperability info "found" by MS very late in the proceeding)

-- innovation incentives much discussed in court proceedings
--- issue possibly exceptional because it has to do with interoperability
-- in substance not so different from the US Microsoft decision on remedies (also compulsory licence of interoperability info)

- Rambus

-- patent ambush, standard setting: locked-in (unreasonable royalties) (for a recent comparative approach see Fischmann: Die Pflicht zur Lizenzerteilung in Patent-Ambush-Fällen nach deutschem und europäischem Kartellrecht, GRUR Int 2010, 185)
-- decision on commitments appealed by Rambus' competitors

- Draft Horizontal Guidelines deal extensively with Standardisation Agreements (in part. pp. 66-81)

- Merger analysis

-- dynamic analysis,

innovative efforts

-- to be decided on the facts on each case

- in any case, competition policy should not be less effective in difficult economic times