Protecting Competition to Innovate is Protecting Competition in Future Markets: Ten Law Review Articles Leave No Doubt

For at least the last 30 years the American and European competition authorities have claimed they can protect competition to innovate. The authorities have at times claimed they can protect competition in an Innovation Market, an R&D Market, or an Innovation Space.  In all these cases however, the authorities have actually protected competition in a Future Market, a market for products at least some of which do not exist yet. In a series of 10 law review articles, which the author summarizes here, he has shown not only that the authorities protect competition in Future Markets, he also explains the Future Markets Model, the methodology the authorities actually use to do so.  The author also shows why so many authorities exert jurisdiction to review the same transaction when that transaction involves Future Markets.  The author also shows why the Future Markets Model explains the authorities’ attempts to protect nascent competition. Regarding the United States, the authority explains Future Potential Competition, the doctrine courts must develop and apply so they can protect competition in Future Markets. Finally, the author shows that American courts have already interpreted the Sherman Act to allow them to protect competition in Future Markets, and says they should do the same when interpreting the Clayton Act.

By Lawrence B. Landman^[1]

The ultimate merger to monopoly is, of course, if the only two firms selling a product become one firm.