The Antitrust Week In Review
Here are some of the developments in antitrust news this past week that we found interesting and are following.
FTC Accuses Endo, Other Drugmakers of Antitrust Violations. The Federal Trade Commission has accused several drugmakers of violating antitrust laws by agreeing to delay the U.S. launches of cheaper generic versions of two popular pain treatments. It’s the first so-called “pay for delay” case brought by the FTC in which a drug’s original maker agreed not to sell its own “authorized generic” version until well after a generic drugmaker began selling its product. These arrangements guaranteed the generic drugmakers would have no competition, and so could keep prices high, for at least six months. The FTC alleges Endo Pharmaceuticals Inc., maker of Opana ER pain pills and the Lidoderm pain patch, paid Impax Laboratories Inc. and Watson Laboratories Inc., respectively, to delay selling their approved generic versions.
Uber CEO must face price-fixing lawsuit by passengers -U.S. judge. Uber CEO Travis Kalanick failed on Thursday to win the dismissal of an antitrust lawsuit accusing him of scheming to drive up prices for passengers who use the popular ride-sharing service. U.S. District Judge Jed Rakoff in Manhattan said Kalanick must face claims he conspired with drivers to ensure they charge prices set by an algorithm in the Uber smartphone app to hail rides, including “surge pricing” during periods of peak demand. The plaintiffs claim that drivers conspired with Kalanick to charge fares set by the algorithm, with an understanding that other Uber drivers would do the same, even if they might fare better acting on their own.
China antitrust proposals trigger foreign business fears over IP protection. Foreign companies with dominant market positions could be increasingly forced to license technology to competitors or face sanctions under China’s latest draft antitrust policy guidelines, according to foreign business groups and attorneys. The proposals include a so-called “essential facilities” doctrine, which assumes some core infrastructure and technology is so important, or the barriers to entry so high, that refusal to share constitutes monopolistic behavior. If interpreted broadly, China’s antitrust policy could force companies to license their intellectual property to Chinese competitors or lower licensing costs to benefit local firms, at a time when China is seeking to promote domestic champions.
EU Opens In-Depth Investigation Into Hutchison, Vimpelcom Italian Deal. European Union antitrust regulators have opened an in-depth investigation into Hutchison’s planned merger of its Italian mobile telecoms business with Vimpelcom’s, on concerns it could lead to higher prices for consumers. “The Commission has concerns that the transaction could lead to higher prices, less choice and reduced innovation for mobile customers in Italy,” the European Commission said in a statement on Wednesday.
Tagged in: Antitrust Enforcement, Antitrust Litigation, International Competition Issues,