(September 26, 2016) On December 17, 2015, the Second Circuit heard oral argument in United States v. American Express Co., No. 15-1672. The three-judge panel questioned the Department of Justice about the analysis of market definition and market power contained in the amicus brief of J. Gregory Sidak, Robert D. Willig, David J. Teece, and Keith N. Hylton. Scholars and experts on the economic analysis of antitrust law, the amici believe that errors in the district court’s opinion threaten to undermine proper economic analysis of antitrust questions in two-sided markets. The amici specifically note three reversible errors committed by the district court concerning: (1) whether American Express possessed market power, (2) the competitive effects of the challenged conduct, and (3) market definition in the two-sided credit card network. Judge Wesley called the judges’ questioning “vigorous” in this “extraordinary” case. One day after oral argument, the Second Circuit, sua sponte, stayed Judge Garaufis’s injunction in United States v. American Express Co., No. 15-1672, and stayed proceedings in any and all matters related to this litigation. On September 26, 2016, Judge Wesley, writing for the Second Circuit, reversed and remanded the case with instructions to enter judgment in favor of American Express.

(Feb. 3, 2016) Global Competition Review has nominated Greg Sidak for its 2016 academic excellence award, which is awarded to “[a]n academic competition specialist who has made an outstanding contribution to national and/or international competition policy in 2015.” In addition, Concurrences nominated Greg for writing awards in three categories:

On February 7, 2006, Greg Sidak debated Larry Lessig on network neutrality before the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation. A decade later, the debate grinds on, with the Federal Communications Commission’s newest rulemaking again being challenged in the D.C. Circuit. Yet the Senate heard virtually every substantive argument for or against net neutrality in the Lessig-Sidak debate a decade ago. Sidak published two exhaustive articles in the Journal of Competition Law & Economics (one with David Teece) on net neutrality.

In 2015, the European Commission issued an official report on FRAND, “Fair, Reasonable and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) Licensing Terms: Research Analysis of a Controversial Concept,” conducted by the European Commission’s in-house Joint Research Centre at the Institute for Prospective Technological Studies. The report cites Greg Sidak’s article, The Meaning of FRAND, Part I: Royalties, published in 2013 in the Journal of Competition Law & Economics. The European Commission’s report explains that one reason why the implementation of the “Ex-Ante Incremental Value” approach has been difficult is because, in the view of SEP holders,

“the method amounts to simulating tough price competition between technologies after inventors have sunk their R&D costs, which gives all the bargaining power to the licensee. . . . [The Ex-Ante Incremental Value approach] therefore fails to preserve inventors’ incentives to invest in R&D and to contribute their inventions to the standard-setting process (Sidak, 2013).”

(Feb. 10, 2015) Global Competition Review nominated Greg Sidak as Economist of the Year, which is awarded to a competition economist whose superior technical skill, practical judgment and excellence in client service demonstrates that he or she is among the very best in the field.

(Nov. 29, 2014) The Economist quoted Judge Robert Bork’s and Greg Sidak’s article, What Does the Chicago School Teach About Internet Search and the Antitrust Treatment of Google?, in a story about the growth of online businesses: “‘That consumers can switch to substitute search engines instantaneously and at zero cost constrains Google’s ability and incentive to act anti-competitively,’ wrote the late Robert Bork, a conservative judge, in a 2012 paper commissioned by Google that he wrote with Gregory Sidak, an antitrust expert. The paper had a wide influence; in 2013 the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), which had been looking into action against Google, decided not to proceed.”

(Nov. 12, 2014) Ned Downie, a Criterion Economics alumnus, has won a Marshall Scholarship to study at Oxford University. Ned was also the first American citizen issued a ten-year visa to China.

(Oct. 17, 2013) Experts Discuss Arbitration of FRAND Disputes at 2013 ANSI Legal Issues Forum, ANSI News & Publications 

(Sept. 3, 2013) Salute to Ronald Coase, 1910-2013, Tilburg University News 

(Nov. 15, 2012) SIDAK: Supreme Court Must Clean Up Washer Mess, Washington Times

(Nov. 1, 2012) Internet Search and the Nature of Competition, The American

(Oct. 8, 2012) Bork and Sidak defend Google against critics, Global Competition Review

(Oct. 6, 2012) Bork and Sidak Joint Statement on Google Antitrust Claims, New York Times 

(Oct. 5, 2012) Broadcast of ‘Google and Antitrust: The New Debate Over Internet Search’, C-SPAN2

(Sept. 2012) How Apple v. Motorola Could Alter Patent Litigation, InsideCounsel

(June 29, 2012) Apple v. Motorola: Implications For Patent Damages, Law360

(June 2012) The OECD’s Proposal to Cartelize Mexican Communications, CPI Antitrust Chronicle

(May 21, 2012) Antitrust Expert: OECD Recommendations Would “Cartelize” Mexican Telecom Market, New York Times

(Apr. 4, 2012) America Movil Asks Colombia To Stop Targeting Prices, Bloomberg