Antitrust

Subscribe to Antitrust via RSS

Shortly before a nine-day bench trial was scheduled to start this morning, Major League Baseball settled an antitrust suit alleging it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball broadcast out-of-market games only as part of a allegedly overpriced all-or-nothing packages.  As part of the settlement, MLB will offer reduced price packages for fans to stream out-of-market…

In an opinion today, Judge Forrest dismissed (with a limited right to replead) claims that various banks and their affiliates conspired to monopolize and inflate prices in the market for zinc stored in warehouses licensed by the London Metal Exchange.  The case is similar to the aluminum antitrust cases before Judge Forrest (covered here).  She found (among other things) that the complaint alleged, at most, parallel conduct.
Continue Reading Judge Forrest Dismisses Zinc Antitrust Case; Chides Lawyers for “Group Pleading”

The plaintiffs and Major League Baseball yesterday exchanged briefs in anticipation of a January 18 trial before Judge Scheindlin in a case alleging it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball to divide the market for broadcasting games into various territories exclusive to the local teams, while allowing the broadcast of out-of-market games only as part of a allegedly overpriced all-or-nothing packages.  (A companion case relating to National Hockey League games was recently settled.)
Continue Reading Parties File Pretrial Briefs in Antitrust Challenge to Baseball’s “Territorial” Broadcast Structure

Last week, Judge Schofield granted U.S. Airways’ motion to reinstate their claim for $70 million in damages ($210 million when trebled under antitrust laws) as part of a third amended complaint in an antitrust action over online booking fees.  Sabre, a global distribution system operator used by travel agents to book flights on multiple airlines, argued that U.S. Airways had already waived the claims in its second amended complaint in an attempt to secure a bench trial and that reinstatement was improper and would prejudice Sabre.  Judge Schofield rejected these arguments, noting that U.S. Airways’ revocation of its waiver did not change the claims at issue (only the damages) and thus amendment was still proper under Rules 15 and 16.
Continue Reading Judge Schofield Allows U.S. Airways to Restore Damages Claim in Antitrust Case Despite Previous Waiver

Last week, the Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation transferred 25 actions pending in three districts to Judge Gardephe as part of a MDL concerning Treasury securities.  According to the Order, the actions all allege that “over 20 defendant banks conspired to manipulate Treasury securities auctions overseen by Federal Reserve Bank of New York, as well…

Last week, an investor class action was filed accusing a a group of banks dealing in interest rate swaps (IRS) of collusion.  According to the complaint, the banks have long dominated the market, and, in recent years, have worked together to stop buy-side investors from gaining the benefit of newly-developed exchanges that should have reduced their dominance:
Continue Reading Class Action Accuses Banks of Collusion in Market for Interest Rate Swaps

The Second Circuit yesterday affirmed an April 2014 decision by Judge Pauley (covered here) rejecting claims that American Express, Citi and Discover colluded to add arbitration clauses barring class actions to their standard card agreements.  Judge Pauley had previously ruled that the defendants had acted individually, and not collusively, when adding class action waivers…

In a 2-1 opinion yesterday, the Second Circuit affirmed the bench trial findings of Judge Cote that Apple orchestrated a price fixing conspiracy with book publishers to collectively raise the $9.99 per-book price that Amazon was charging and that publishers believed was damaging to their business in the long term. Apple signed contracts with the publishers for its own e-bookstore under an “agency model” (in which the publishers set the price and Apple would take a cut), and those contracts included a “most-favored nations” clause requiring the publishers to price the books in Apple’s store at the lowest offered anywhere else. The Second Circuit agreed with Judge Cote that the intended effect of these terms was to compel the publishers to act together to challenge Amazon’s flat, $9.99 pricing:
Continue Reading Second Circuit Affirms Antitrust Ruling Against Apple in E-Books Case

In an opinion today, Judge Schiendlin certified a Rule 23(b)(2) injunction class in a case alleging that it is anticompetitive for Major League Baseball and the National Hockey League to divide the market for games into various territories exclusive to the local teams, while allowing the broadcast of out-of-market games only as part of all-or-nothing packages like MLB Extra Innings or NHL Center Ice. The defendants’ primary argument against class certification was that the class would impermissibly consist of those would benefit from a dismantling of the existing structure — e.g., a Yankee fan in Iowa who would prefer to be able to buy a package of just Yankee games — and those who would be harmed — e.g., a Yankee fan in Iowa who would in all events buy the full MLB Extra Innings package but, if a-la-carte options were available, might not have the package option or might have to pay more.  According to the defendants, these “winners” and “losers” cannot form a cohesive class.  Judge Scheindlin concluded that this argument “fails three times over”:
Continue Reading Judge Scheindlin Certifies Injunction Class in Antitrust Challenge to “Territorial” Structure of Sports Broadcasts