Antitrust & Competition Policy Blog

Editor: D. Daniel Sokol
University of Florida
Levin College of Law

A Member of the Law Professor Blogs Network

Tuesday, July 3, 2007

Sharfman on Billing

Posted by D. Daniel Sokol

Keith Sharfman of Rutgers-Newark Law School provides an interesting analysis of the implications of Billing on eCCP's website.  An early paragraph sums up Sharfman's take on the case's implications:

Credit Suisse has important implications for antitrust practice. The decision’s effect is to narrow the scope of antitrust law and to invite efforts by regulated industries to narrow it still further. The court’s “clearly incompatible” standard is new and (though it purports not to) seems to water down considerably the old “plain repugnancy” test of Gordon v. New York Stock Exchange, Inc. 422 U.S. 659, 682 (1975). Under the new incompatibility standard, there no longer has to be an actual conflict between antitrust and other federal law for antitrust implicitly not to apply. Even a mere regulatory overlap may now be sufficient to trigger antitrust immunity. (Recall that in Credit Suisse the Court assumed that both antitrust and the SEC disapproved of the tying and other practices in question, and yet the Court still considered the two bodies of law incompatible on account of the regulatory overlap.)

http://lawprofessors.typepad.com/antitrustprof_blog/2007/07/sharfman-on-bil.html

| Permalink

TrackBack URL for this entry:

http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341bfae553ef00e008d1341b8834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Sharfman on Billing:

Comments

Post a comment