The Experts below are selected from a list of 7611 Experts worldwide ranked by ideXlab platform
John M Yun - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century privacy big data and competition comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted in response to the United States federal trade commission (“FTC”) hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. We submit this comment based upon our extensive experience and expertise in antitrust law and economics. As an organization committed to promoting sound economic analysis as the foundation of antitrust enforcement and competition policy, the Global Antitrust Institute commends the FTC for holding these hearings and for inviting discussion concerning a range of important topics. Businesses today have greater access to data than ever before. Firms now have access to data at high volume, high velocity, and high variety—a phenomenon known as “big data.” The increasing prevalence of big data creates new questions for antitrust enforcers. This comment will discuss how big data should be considered in the context of antitrust analyses.
-
the united states federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century hearing on concentration and competitiveness in the u s economy comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
-
the federal trade commission s hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century the consumer welfare standard in antitrust law comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century, The Consumer Welfare Standard in Antitrust Law. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
Joshua D Wright - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
what is an independent agency to do the trump administration s executive order on preventing online censorship and the federal trade commission
Social Science Research Network, 2021Co-Authors: Joshua D Wright, Alexander KrzepickiAbstract:President Trump’s Executive Order on Preventing Online Censorship is the latest in a series of proposals aimed at independent agencies, chiefly the federal Communications commission (FCC) and federal trade commission (FTC), that seek to police how tech companies operate their social media platforms. These measures suffer from fatal defects. They run against the weight of First Amendment law and, our focus, beyond the limits of FTC Section 5 authority. We briefly summarize the scope of that authority before analyzing the Executive Order against the backdrop of the First Amendment and Section 5; concluding it would be illegal and imprudent to enforce. We conclude with suggestions for how the FTC should handle the position it finds itself in—facing an Executive Order to consider and study unlawful enforcement actions that not only undermine its independence, but also shift its attention away from its primary mission of consumer protection toward policing free speech.
-
the federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century privacy big data and competition comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted in response to the United States federal trade commission (“FTC”) hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. We submit this comment based upon our extensive experience and expertise in antitrust law and economics. As an organization committed to promoting sound economic analysis as the foundation of antitrust enforcement and competition policy, the Global Antitrust Institute commends the FTC for holding these hearings and for inviting discussion concerning a range of important topics. Businesses today have greater access to data than ever before. Firms now have access to data at high volume, high velocity, and high variety—a phenomenon known as “big data.” The increasing prevalence of big data creates new questions for antitrust enforcers. This comment will discuss how big data should be considered in the context of antitrust analyses.
-
the united states federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century hearing on concentration and competitiveness in the u s economy comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
-
the federal trade commission s hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century the consumer welfare standard in antitrust law comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century, The Consumer Welfare Standard in Antitrust Law. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
-
whither symmetry antitrust analysis of intellectual property rights at the ftc and doj
CPI Journal, 2013Co-Authors: Joshua D Wright, Douglas H GinsburgAbstract:In modern antitrust law, intellectual property rights (IPRs) are treated like all other forms of property. Joshua D. Wright (US federal trade commission) & Douglas H. Ginsburg (US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit)
Tad Lipsky - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century privacy big data and competition comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted in response to the United States federal trade commission (“FTC”) hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. We submit this comment based upon our extensive experience and expertise in antitrust law and economics. As an organization committed to promoting sound economic analysis as the foundation of antitrust enforcement and competition policy, the Global Antitrust Institute commends the FTC for holding these hearings and for inviting discussion concerning a range of important topics. Businesses today have greater access to data than ever before. Firms now have access to data at high volume, high velocity, and high variety—a phenomenon known as “big data.” The increasing prevalence of big data creates new questions for antitrust enforcers. This comment will discuss how big data should be considered in the context of antitrust analyses.
-
the united states federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century hearing on concentration and competitiveness in the u s economy comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
-
the federal trade commission s hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century the consumer welfare standard in antitrust law comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century, The Consumer Welfare Standard in Antitrust Law. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
Chris Jay Hoofnagle - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the federal trade commission s inner privacy struggle
SSRN, 2018Co-Authors: Chris Jay HoofnagleAbstract:Author(s): Hoofnagle, Chris | Abstract: The federal trade commission (FTC) is not of a single mind on privacy matters. Its privacy efforts are led by attorneys in the agency’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, who are entrusted with case selection. These privacy efforts are evaluated by economists in the agency’s Bureau of Economics, who are skeptical of information privacy crusades. The tensions between these groups is not well understood by outsiders, yet these tensions provide a powerful explanation for the FTC’s privacy enforcement behavior. Understanding these tensions will grow in importance as the President Trump administration shapes the FTC. Going forward, the Bureau of economics is likely to have a more central, public role in case selection. The Bureau of Economics will also push to have more cases pled under the agency’s unfairness theory, because this cause of action gives the economists more space to introduce cost-benefit analysis.This chapter discusses the cultural and ideological conflicts internal to the FTC on privacy, and explains why the lawyers at the commission are leading the privacy charge. This is because the Bureau of Economics is constitutionally skeptical of information privacy. Privacy skepticism reflects the economists’ academic methods and ideological commitments. While information privacy is a deeply multidisciplinary field, the Bureau of Economics adheres to a disciplinarity that bounds its inquiry and causes it to follow a laissez faire literature. Commitments to “consumer welfare,” concerns about innovation policy, lingering effects of Reagan-era leadership, the lack of a clearly-defined market for privacy, and the return of rule of reason analysis in antitrust also contribute to the Bureau of Economics’ skepticism toward rights-based privacy regimes.The chapter concludes with a roadmap for expanding the BE’s disciplinary borders, for enriching its understanding of the market for privacy, and for a reinvigoration of the FTC’s civil penalty factors as a lodestar for privacy remedies.
-
the federal trade commission s inner privacy struggle
Social Science Research Network, 2017Co-Authors: Chris Jay HoofnagleAbstract:The federal trade commission (FTC) is not of a single mind on privacy matters. Its privacy efforts are led by attorneys in the agency’s Bureau of Consumer Protection, who are entrusted with case selection. These privacy efforts are evaluated by economists in the agency’s Bureau of Economics, who are skeptical of information privacy crusades. The tensions between these groups is not well understood by outsiders, yet these tensions provide a powerful explanation for the FTC’s privacy enforcement behavior. Understanding these tensions will grow in importance as the President Trump administration shapes the FTC. Going forward, the Bureau of economics is likely to have a more central, public role in case selection. The Bureau of Economics will also push to have more cases pled under the agency’s unfairness theory, because this cause of action gives the economists more space to introduce cost-benefit analysis.This chapter discusses the cultural and ideological conflicts internal to the FTC on privacy, and explains why the lawyers at the commission are leading the privacy charge. This is because the Bureau of Economics is constitutionally skeptical of information privacy. Privacy skepticism reflects the economists’ academic methods and ideological commitments. While information privacy is a deeply multidisciplinary field, the Bureau of Economics adheres to a disciplinarity that bounds its inquiry and causes it to follow a laissez faire literature. Commitments to “consumer welfare,” concerns about innovation policy, lingering effects of Reagan-era leadership, the lack of a clearly-defined market for privacy, and the return of rule of reason analysis in antitrust also contribute to the Bureau of Economics’ skepticism toward rights-based privacy regimes. The chapter concludes with a roadmap for expanding the BE’s disciplinary borders, for enriching its understanding of the market for privacy, and for a reinvigoration of the FTC’s civil penalty factors as a lodestar for privacy remedies.
-
assessing the federal trade commission s privacy assessments
IEEE Symposium on Security and Privacy, 2016Co-Authors: Chris Jay HoofnagleAbstract:Regulators worldwide need to keep tabs on companies caught violating consumer protection rules. Assessments by outside accounting firms are a key tool for regulators to detect privacy and security problems. It's not widely known that an assessment, a term of art in accounting, is a less-intense evaluation than an audit. Also, in practice, assessments overseen by America's top consumer protection cop, the US federal trade commission, fall short of what's needed to ensure that information-intensive companies are protecting privacy and honoring promises. This article outlines five practical steps to make company oversight more effective.
-
federal trade commission privacy law and policy
2016Co-Authors: Chris Jay HoofnagleAbstract:The federal trade commission, a US agency created in 1914 to police the problem of 'bigness', has evolved into the most important regulator of information privacy - and thus innovation policy - in the world. Its policies profoundly affect business practices and serve to regulate most of the consumer economy. In short, it now regulates our technological future. Despite its stature, however, the agency is often poorly understood by observers and even those who practice before it. This volume by Chris Jay Hoofnagle - an internationally recognized scholar with more than fifteen years of experience interacting with the FTC - is designed to redress this confusion by explaining how the FTC arrived at its current position of power. It will be essential reading for lawyers, legal academics, political scientists, historians and anyone else interested in understanding the FTC's privacy activities and how they fit in the context of the agency's broader consumer protection mission.
-
federal trade commission privacy law and policy introduction and excerpt
2016Co-Authors: Chris Jay HoofnagleAbstract:federal trade commission Privacy Law and Policy is an in-depth history of the FTC’s 100-year-long consumer protection efforts. It explains how decades of false advertising enforcement informs today’s privacy efforts. It contains practical advice for lawyers practicing before the agency, strategy for advocates, and insight for policymakers on the challenge of addressing unfair and deceptive trade practices. Most importantly, the book provides context for the agency’s powers and procedure.The FTC’s regulation of technology and privacy is not new. The FTC’s first reported case concerned a company that treated cotton so that it could be passed off as silk. Its first privacy case dealt with an early kind of information broker that tricked people into revealing personal information so that debt collectors could locate them. Reviewing the history of these cases and the rationales that gave rise to the FTC helps us understand broader policy problems in consumer protection.
Douglas H Ginsburg - One of the best experts on this subject based on the ideXlab platform.
-
the federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century privacy big data and competition comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted in response to the United States federal trade commission (“FTC”) hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. We submit this comment based upon our extensive experience and expertise in antitrust law and economics. As an organization committed to promoting sound economic analysis as the foundation of antitrust enforcement and competition policy, the Global Antitrust Institute commends the FTC for holding these hearings and for inviting discussion concerning a range of important topics. Businesses today have greater access to data than ever before. Firms now have access to data at high volume, high velocity, and high variety—a phenomenon known as “big data.” The increasing prevalence of big data creates new questions for antitrust enforcers. This comment will discuss how big data should be considered in the context of antitrust analyses.
-
the united states federal trade commission hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century hearing on concentration and competitiveness in the u s economy comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearing on Concentration and Competitiveness in the U.S. Economy as part of the Hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
-
the federal trade commission s hearings on competition and consumer protection in the 21st century the consumer welfare standard in antitrust law comment of the global antitrust institute antonin scalia law school george mason university
Social Science Research Network, 2018Co-Authors: Tad Lipsky, Joshua D Wright, Douglas H Ginsburg, John M YunAbstract:This comment is submitted by the Global Antitrust Institute (GAI) at Scalia Law School at George Mason University to the U.S. federal trade commission regarding its hearings on Competition and Consumer Protection in the 21st Century, The Consumer Welfare Standard in Antitrust Law. The GAI Competition Advocacy Program provides a wide range of recommendations to facilitate adoption of economically sound competition policy.
-
whither symmetry antitrust analysis of intellectual property rights at the ftc and doj
CPI Journal, 2013Co-Authors: Joshua D Wright, Douglas H GinsburgAbstract:In modern antitrust law, intellectual property rights (IPRs) are treated like all other forms of property. Joshua D. Wright (US federal trade commission) & Douglas H. Ginsburg (US Court of Appeals, DC Circuit)
