Half Day Conference – IP and Comp. issues arising from the Google Book Settlement – 12 February, Brussels
The Google Book Settlement is not only a US, intellectual property, issue. Its consequences may be felt in Europe and elsewhere in the world, and cover other areas, such as privacy, cultural policy, and competition law.
This is why my research institute (IEJE, University of Liege) has decided to hold, on 12 February in Brussels, a half-day conference entitled “The Google Book Settlement – The Challenge of Building a Digital Library that Benefits All”. This conference is a joint effort of the IEJE and the Centre for Innovation and Intellectual Property of the St Louis Faculties in Brussels.
Important Appointments
Congratulations to Thibaud Vergé who has just been appointed Chief Economist of the French Competition Authority. Thibaud Vergé is a very strong economist who, amongst other things, co-authored influential pieces on vertical agreements with Patrick Rey. See here.
In addition to this, Carlos Martinez-Mongay (Spanish, previously head of unit in DG Ecofin) and Olivier Guersent (French, previously head of DG Competition’s Cartels Directorate) are poised to become heads of the cabinets of J. Almunia (competition) and M. Barnier (internal market and financial services).
(Image possibly subject to copyrights: source here)
EU Competition Celebrities Confess
From a purely academic point of view, it may be regretted that the judgment was not brought on appeal before the ECJ so Europe’s highest Court could have its final say in the case. However, sooner or later, either through a direct action or through a reference for a preliminary ruling under Article 234 EC, the ECJ may find the occasion to examine and decide on the delicate balance that must be struck between IPRs and competition law.
Regarding the tying part in the judgment, it is probably the case that less people are worried about the consequences of the judgment, even though, also in this respect, it is necessary to bear in mind that the risks entailed in overstretching the concept of tying can become a serious constraint for what otherwise would be valuable development and innovation to the benefit of consumers. As Advocate General Francis Jacobs once put it, competition law is not there to protect competitors but competition and the consumers.
Mario Monti, former competition Commissionner is also reported to have said that the Microsoft case:
“was “certainly” his most difficult case; […] “Not for its technical complexity, but because of the rather drastic trade-off to be made after the long investigation. After three days of intensive negotiations with the CEO to achieve a settlement, a good phase in the mutual negotiations, we concluded that we were interested […] to achieve a precedent“. ( Source: M-Lex, 14 September 2009, “Monti warns of threat to competition policy ‘from within’”, D. LUMDSEN).
This lends credit to the unofficial, “off the record“, story that Monti and Vesterdorf have not been entirely free to call the shots, and that they might have even been placed in a minority position at some stage.
(Image possibly subject to copyrights. Source here)
My Slides – IEB/Universidad Complutense Programme – Madrid
I attach the slides I presented in Madrid. The first set of slides is an introduction to EU competition law. The second set of slides deals with the concepts of agreements, concerted practices and decisions of associations of undertakings.
General introduction – xiii_curso_de_derecho_de_la_competencia_ieb (1
BTW: Iberia is amongst the least professional and reliable airlines. My flight, which was supposed to leave Madrid yesterday at 7.15 pm, eventually left at 3.15 am. I arrived at home this morning around 7.00 am…. This is not the first time I have problems with this company. I filed a formal complaint. Let’s see how things turn out.
(image possibly subject to copyrights: see here)
20,000 visits
20,000 visits on this blog in a little more than 4 months. Beyond our expectations. Thanks to all of you.
I am today in Madrid, where Luis Ortiz Blanco and Pablo Ibanez Colomo invited me to give to lecture in the context of a competition law course intended to Spanish public officials and private practitioners. The programme is organized by the Universidad Complutense and the Instituto de Estudios Bursatiles (IEB). The brochure can be found below.
Everything you always wanted to know on the Lisbon Treaty (but were too afraid to ask)
My research institute (IEJE) organizes on 26 February in Brussels a conference on the Lisbon Treaty. We have invited top notch european law specialists. Although not my primary field of specialization, I really cannot wait for the conference (I actually think that the effect of the Lisbon Treaty on EU competition law has been somewhat underrated, will come back to this in a forthcoming paper) . Programme and registration form can be found below.
Just Published
- From Formalism to Effects? The Commission’s Communication on Enforcement Priorities in Applying Article 82 EC – World Competition 2009(4) – This is a written, extended, version of a speech I delivered in July 2009 at the Polish Office for the Protection of Competition and Consumers. Thanks again to S. Jozwiak and the President of the Office for their kind invitation.
- Chronique de l’affaire Belgacom/Scarlett – La fin de la récréation pour l’opérateur historique? – I wrote this paper with a former Howrey colleague, Ief Daems. The paper argues that the Belgian Competition Council has seemingly decided to follow a stronger enforcement policy in the telecoms sector. Yet, a number of flaws remain. In particular, it questions (i) wether the network divesture remedy imposed by the Council, and the conditions attached to it, are really effective; and (ii) the opportunity of allowing a State-owned company to acquire the business divested by Belgacom…
Dissertation Summaries (14) – LLM in IP and Competition Law 2009-2010
The Strategic Use of EU Competition Law: Typology and Assessment – Anne-Sophie Come (annesophie.come@gmail.com)
Legal affairs are no longer a “support” function for business entities. Firms increasingly rely on legal rules, proceedings and remedies, as strategic, profit maximising, levers. As a result of this evolution, firms increasingly seek to use (some say “instrumentalize”) the legal system in order to gain competitive advantages over/inflict competitive disadvantages to their rivals. In this context, it is the purpose of this dissertation to review the extent to which firms seek to use, and have used, EU competition law for strategic business reasons alien to the mere eradication of anticompetitive conduct in the market place. To this end, it provides a new reading of a number of well-known cases decided by the Commission and the Court of Justice.
Dissertation Summaries (13) – LLM in IP and Competition Law 2009-2010
Recent Antitrust News
- The Commission has opened a consultation process on Best practices in antitrust proceedings, submission of economic evidence and on a Hearing Officers’ guidance paper. This initiative should lead to the adoption of much welcome guidelines on competition proceedings.
- Congratulations to D. Geradin who has recently been appointed William W. Cook Global Law Professor at Michigan Law.
- R. H. Lande has posted the best and the worst AT developments of the last decade. Within the AT community Lande is a non-conformist. His views often spark controversy. Although I often disagree with his positions, I like the fact that Lande stands up to challenge the easy, and overly rehashed, “small antitrust” arguments that have influenced, and still heavily influence, antitrust scholarship.
- The EU Commissioners’ hearings at the European Parliament will be shown live online here this coming week. Almunia’s hearing will take place on Tuesday in Brussels, from 4:30 to 7:30 pm. I attach hereafter the answers prepared by Almunia to the written questionnaire of MEPs (word document): Answers to EP Questionnaire – Commissionner Designate Almunia
(Image possibly subject to copyrights: source here)
