Joseph V. Coniglio

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.

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.

By foreclosing Apple from charging a commission for linked transactions, the district court inexplicably decided to prohibit Apple from engaging in unilateral pricing conduct that was not—and cannot be—found to violate the antitrust laws.

Although the Draft Guidelines provide guidance for stakeholders as to how the Act will be enforced, they do not adequately ensure that harms to mobile innovation and Japanese consumers will be minimized.

While the ultimate ruling by Judge Boasberg remains uncertain, the tea leaves do seem to point to yet another defeat for the FTC against Meta.

While targeted rules and regulations which address real market failures and improve the status quo can be defensible, there are many that do not benefit competition or consumers and should likely be rescinded.

While targeted rules and regulations which address real market failures and improve the status quo can be defensible, there are many that do not benefit competition or consumers and should likely be rescinded.

The district court’s Order substantially risks disrupting the iOS ecosystem by sua sponte preventing Apple from exercising its right to charge what it wishes for the use of its platform. That is not behavior that was found to violate California’s UCL and for good reason: above cost pricing is per se lawful and an essential part of the market system upon which the antitrust laws are premised.

Obsessions with “Big Business” and “Tryanny.com” appear to have trumped not just fashioning legally sound antitrust relief, but winning the United States’ geopolitical competition with China.

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.

Joseph Coniglio speaks about antitrust and artificial intelligence at the Antitrust Midwest Conference hosted by Informa Connect.

Joseph V. Coniglio speaks about remedies in the DOJ v. Google search antitrust case at a panel hosted by the D.C. Bar.

Joseph V. Coniglio speaks on the longstanding debate over whether liberty in commerce enhances or undermines broader human flourishing.

Watch this virtual panel with top experts who discussed this important decision, its implications for the social media landscape, and what it means for Meta as the Trump administration continues its antitrust crusade against “Big Tech.”

Joseph Coniglio speaks about the Digital Markets Act and cybersecurity at a panel hosted by the European Centre for International Political Economy.

Watch this virtual webinar featuring experts who discussed this important decision, its implications for the ad tech space, and what it means for Google as its antitrust battles with the DOJ escalate.

Watch now for a virtual panel with top experts who will discussed the key issues going to trial, the implications for Google and the future of search, and what the case means for U.S. antitrust law and the broader “big tech” debate.

Watch the webinar event where panlists discussed how antitrust enforcement might change with the new administration, whether the Trump enforcers will carry forward any of the neo-Brandeisian policies, and what the future may have in store for the FTC.

Watch now for a virtual panel discussion with experts exploring the merits and implications of the DOJ v. Google ad tech case.

Watch now for an event hosted by ITIF's Schumpeter Project on Competition Policy, featuring leading antitrust experts from Taiwan, Japan, Korea, and the United States.

Watch now for a timely panel discussion featuring leading antitrust lawyers from India and the United States.