Antitrust remedies -- criminal and civil, public and private, penalties and injunctions -- are supposed to “eliminate the effects of the illegal conduct” and “restore competition.” In pursuing these goals, courts and enforcers are guided by the standard of economic efficiency and by...

Frank Easterbrook's 1984 article, The Limits of Antitrust, did not focus on public antitrust enforcement. Nevertheless, it expressed the kind of antitrust thinking that led the Antitrust Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, around the same time, to shift its resources to cartel...

In this article, first published in 17 Managerial & Decision Econ. 127 (1996), we show how economic theory guides the courts' determinations of which harms from collusive and exclusionary practices constitute antitrust injury

This article, published in 1991, describes the two great ideologies of the market and the state that shaped antitrust law at its inception. In the evolutionary vision, market outcomes are spontaneous and unintended results of countless interactions of self-interested individuals; the resulting...

This article, published in 1981, examines the two-part Midcal Aluminum standard for state action antitrust immunity. Under that standard, private actors are immune from antitrust liability if (1) they act pursuant to a regulatory policy that is clearly articulated by the state as sovereign and...

Aspen Skiing v. Aspen Highlands Skiing has had theoretical importance for antitrust law far out of proportion to the trivial dispute it resolved. It has divided adherents of the Chicago and Post-Chicago Schools, providing a useful vehicle for considering the proper goals of antitrust. And it has...

An important provision in each of the final judgments in the government's Microsoft antitrust case requires Microsoft "make available" to software developers the communications protocols that Windows client operating systems use to interoperate "natively" (that is, without adding software) with...

The Antitrust Division’s Microsoft case and the Federal Trade Commission’s Intel case both rested on claims that antitrust intervention was necessary to preserve innovation in technological platforms at the heart of the personal computer. Yet, because those very platforms support markets...