Antitrust

Please join ITIF’s Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy for a virtual panel with top experts who will discuss the landmark Google Search decision, its implications for the future of search, and what it means for Google as its antitrust battles with the DOJ continue.

Korea’s incoming KFTC leadership should oppose reviving ex ante platform regulation. Such rules are unnecessary, rest on flawed premises, and would weaken both innovation and strategic alliances.

The focus of the guidelines is to help assess whether a merger would significantly impede effective competition or create or strengthen a dominant position. Unfortunately, this structural understanding of competition differs from a conception of competition as either a dynamic process or a consumer welfare proscription, both of which are far better suited to having a productive and growing economy.

EU regulatory regimes discriminate against leading U.S. tech firms, chill innovation and the liberties that underlie a culture of freedom, encourage copycat regulations around the world, and undermine the West’s competitiveness against China.

Rehearing is not only permissible but warranted in this exceptionally important case. It is necessary to reconcile this Court’s antitrust rulings on the robust nature of competition in the highly dynamic mobile gaming space.

The EU’s €376 million fine against Intel for decades-old conduct risks weakening a struggling Western chipmaker at a time when China is heavily investing to dominate the semiconductor industry.

ITIF disagrees with the Competition and Markets Authority's provisional findings that Google's mobile platform has Strategic Market Status and that there are high barriers to entry and expansion.

ITIF does not agree with the Competition and Markets Authority's provisional findings that Apple's mobile platform has Strategic Market Status and that there are high barriers to entry and expansion.

The Bureau should not treat algorithmic pricing as a risk category in itself. The relevant concern is not whether pricing is algorithmic, dynamic, or AI-enabled, but whether it is used to harm competition or consumers. Addressing that will require focusing on market context and firm conduct rather than the type of tool used.

The European Commission’s DMA action against Meta reveals a strategy of using data protection law principles to stretch competition rules beyond their intended scope—ultimately setting a compliance bar no gatekeeper can meet, infantilizing users, and selectively targeting successful integrated American platforms.