Chairman Joe Simons recused himself from the FTC’s Qualcomm case in California federal court claiming anti-competitive patent licensing behavior (see 1809190041), an agency spokesperson said Tuesday. The spokesperson declined to give a reason. Simons previously was a partner at Paul Weiss, which has represented Qualcomm. Simons’ recusal divides the commissioners evenly along party lines, and the commission wouldn't act in a 2-2 vote. Documents Simons submitted to the agency disclosing his previous clients and investments don't list any Qualcomm entities. A federal judge on Tuesday denied a joint request from the FTC and Qualcomm to delay the ruling to allow for settlement talks.
Two tech trade group representatives played down the value of consumer data during Tuesday’s FTC policy hearing (see 1810310052). Another industry official argued too much focus is on drawbacks of big-data collection, not enough on benefits.
Chairman Joe Simons recused himself from the FTC’s Qualcomm case in California federal court claiming anti-competitive patent licensing behavior (see 1809190041), an agency spokesperson said Tuesday. The spokesperson declined to give a reason. Simons previously was a partner at Paul Weiss, which has represented Qualcomm. Simons’ recusal divides the commissioners evenly along party lines, and the commission wouldn't act in a 2-2 vote. Documents Simons submitted to the agency disclosing his previous clients and investments don't list any Qualcomm entities. A federal judge on Tuesday denied a joint request from the FTC and Qualcomm to delay the ruling to allow for settlement talks.
Chairman Joe Simons recused himself from the FTC’s Qualcomm case in California federal court claiming anti-competitive patent licensing behavior (see 1809190041), an agency spokesperson said Tuesday. The spokesperson declined to give a reason. Simons previously was a partner at Paul Weiss, which has represented Qualcomm. Simons’ recusal divides the commissioners evenly along party lines, and the commission wouldn't act in a 2-2 vote. Documents Simons submitted to the agency disclosing his previous clients and investments don't list any Qualcomm entities. A federal judge on Tuesday denied a joint request from the FTC and Qualcomm to delay the ruling to allow for settlement talks.
Two tech trade group representatives played down the value of consumer data during Tuesday’s FTC policy hearing (see 1810310052). Another industry official argued too much focus is on drawbacks of big-data collection, not enough on benefits.
The Supreme Court will hear argument Nov. 26 in Apple v. Robert Pepper, with implications for app stores. The conservative majority figures to favor Apple interests, stakeholders told us. Justices will decide whether Apple customers can sue for antitrust damages in a case, docket 17-204 (see 1810100058), stemming from a lawsuit claiming Apple has a monopoly through its App Store. Apple, which collects a 30 percent commission on apps purchased, limits iOS users to installing apps through that store, unless they jailbreak their phones, voiding warranty. Pepper argued this anticompetitive model lets developers pass added costs onto users. App developers benefit greatly from the App Store, given the booming app economy, and the liability and security protections the store offers, Pepper argued, making it unlikely developers will challenge Apple’s model.
The Supreme Court will hear argument Nov. 26 in Apple v. Robert Pepper, with implications for app stores. The conservative majority figures to favor Apple interests, stakeholders told us. Justices will decide whether Apple customers can sue for antitrust damages in a case, docket 17-204 (see 1810100058), stemming from a lawsuit claiming Apple has a monopoly through its App Store. Apple, which collects a 30 percent commission on apps purchased, limits iOS users to installing apps through that store, unless they jailbreak their phones, voiding warranty. Pepper argued this anticompetitive model lets developers pass added costs onto users. App developers benefit greatly from the App Store, given the booming app economy, and the liability and security protections the store offers, Pepper argued, making it unlikely developers will challenge Apple’s model.
The Supreme Court will hear argument Nov. 26 in Apple v. Robert Pepper, with implications for app stores. The conservative majority figures to favor Apple interests, stakeholders told us. Justices will decide whether Apple customers can sue for antitrust damages in a case, docket 17-204 (see 1810100058), stemming from a lawsuit claiming Apple has a monopoly through its App Store. Apple, which collects a 30 percent commission on apps purchased, limits iOS users to installing apps through that store, unless they jailbreak their phones, voiding warranty. Pepper argued this anticompetitive model lets developers pass added costs onto users. App developers benefit greatly from the App Store, given the booming app economy, and the liability and security protections the store offers, Pepper argued, making it unlikely developers will challenge Apple’s model.
FTC Commissioner Noah Phillips said he’s open to alternatives to the consumer welfare standard, which guides U.S. antitrust law. The agency fielded a wide range of opinions about the standard during its fifth competition policy hearing Thursday.
FTC Commissioner Noah Phillips said he’s open to alternatives to the consumer welfare standard, which guides U.S. antitrust law. The agency fielded a wide range of opinions about the standard during its fifth competition policy hearing Thursday.