In this issue:
-
linkLine Commc’ns v. SBC California, 503 F.3d 876 (9th Cir. 2007)
Whither Price Squeeze Antitrust?
The Ninth Circuit’s decision in LinkLine Communications, Inc. v. SBC California creates a split in circuit court decisions on price squeeze claims post-Trinko.
Comment on linkLine
The Ninth Circuit’s majority opinion in Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. linkLine Communications, Inc. is a thoughtful and not at all unreasonable approach to the application of the antitrust laws to telecommunications.
linkLine v. SBC: Back to the Future?
In October, a group of academics filed a brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant the petition for certiorari in Pacific Bell v. linkLine. In and of itself, this is not surprising. But the coalition of academics is uncommonly broad and the tone of the brief is quite strident. Although their brief is a tad alarmist, the academics are right.
Comment on linkLine: A Call for Clarity
The Ninth Circuit’s failure in linkLine to provide any objective standards as to how the factfinder should determine a “fair price” creates great uncertainty about the potential for antitrust liability whenever a monopolist lowers its price to retail customers.
