Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law
Competition: SPRING 2023, Vol 33, No. 1
Content
- 133 Years Young: Sherman Act Section Two Keeps Up With Big Tech
- Antitrust Restoration From California Anchored By a New Monopolization Synthesis
- California Should Amend the Cartwright Act To Address Single-firm Monopolization
- Competition Beyond Rivalry: Adapting Antitrust Merger Review To Address Market Realties
- Dormant Commerce Clause: a Potential Brake On State Antitrust Legislation
- Executive Committee
- Message From the Advisors
- Message From the Editor
- Over-prescription Is Bad Medicine: the Case Against a Knee-jerk Revision of Antitrust Injury
- Restrictions On Worker Mobility and the Need For Stronger Policies On Anticompetitive Employment Contract Provisions
- Should California Adopt Revisions Proposed By Congress and the New York State Legislature To Address Single-firm Conduct?
- Table of Contents
- Technological Monopolies, Innovation, and the Personal Freedom To Form Businesses: Like Oil and Water?
- The Adaptable Antitrust Laws
- The Risks of Requiring California-specific Merger Approvals
- Why Has California Waited So Long To Enact Its Own Merger Review Law?
- Updating the Cartwright Act For the Twenty-first Century: Allowing Antitrust Claims For Unilateral Conduct
UPDATING THE CARTWRIGHT ACT FOR THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY: ALLOWING ANTITRUST CLAIMS FOR UNILATERAL CONDUCT
By Joshua P. Davis and Julie A. Pollock1
I. INTRODUCTION
California has long been a leader in legal regulation. It sets its own standards for automobile emissions, for example, affecting how manufacturers design and build cars.2 It is often at the forefront of consumer privacy regulation.3 4 That should be unsurprising. Our federalist system encourages states to act as "experimental social laboratories."5
Further, California has a particularly strong claim to adopt its own policies. If it were a nation unto itself, it would have ranked as the fifth largest economy in the world in 2022,6 and it is trending toward fourth, behind only the rest of the United States, China, and Japan.7 Its influence on the law, then, is not out of proportion with its economic influence.