NCAA vs. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma: A Win for Antitrust Law and College Football Fans
College Sports, Video Games & the Right of Publicity With Guest Michael McCann of Sportico
JONES DAY TALKS®: Alston, the NCAA, and the Future of College Sports
Game On: College Sports, Video Games & the Right of Publicity With Guest Michael McCann of Sportico
You should also be aware that the U.S. Justice Department (DOJ) and the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) historically have been active in the health care industry, with many prosecutions of physicians and dentists for antitrust...more
The U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts recently issued a long-anticipated ruling in an antitrust challenge to the so-called Northeast Alliance, or NEA, between American Airlines Group Inc. and JetBlue...more
Key Points - Until recently, the McCarran-Ferguson Act of 1954 made the “business of insurance,” including the business of health insurance, immune from federal antitrust laws. - The Competitive Health Insurance Reform...more
The Development: Congress unanimously passed and before leaving office, President Trump signed into law, the Competitive Health Insurance Reform Act ("CHIRA"). CHIRA limits application of the McCarran-Ferguson Act, an...more
The 10th amendment to the German Act against Restraints of Competition (ARC) - also called the “Digitalization Act” - became effective on January 19, 2021. In a previous alert, we discussed the key aspects of the...more
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (Wilson Sonsini) is pleased to present its 2019 Antitrust Year in Review, which summarizes the most significant antitrust matters and developments of the past year. Over the past few years,...more
Section 1 of the Sherman Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1, prohibits “every contract, combination … or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce.” Determining whether such a “contract, combination … or conspiracy” (i.e., the agreement...more
For centuries employers have maintained a strong interest in trying to protect their most valuable asset, their key employees, from solicitation by and loss to other employers, especially competitors. As a result, “no...more
On April 9, 2018, the producer of the Soul’d Out music festival in Portland, Oregon, sued the owners and producers of the Coachella music festival in California for what it alleges are anticompetitive contract terms that...more
Coachella Valley Music and Arts Festival owner Anschutz Entertainment Group Inc. (“AEG”) and its subsidiaries and affiliates were hit with a lawsuit for allegedly using anticompetitive practices such as prohibiting artists...more
Wilson Sonsini Goodrich & Rosati (WSGR) is pleased to present its 2017 Antitrust Year in Review.In this report, we summarize the most significant antitrust matters and developments of the past year. We begin with a look at...more
The Michigan Antitrust Reform Act (MARA) contains a specific provision, MCL 445.774a, that governs the enforceability of noncompete agreements between employees and employers. MARA does not, however, provide standards for...more
Allegations of conspiracy to restrain trade and exclusive dealing may read like textbook antitrust claims, but if the allegations are made by a plaintiff who is not an “efficient enforcer” of the antitrust laws, the complaint...more
In North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners v. F.T.C., No. 13-534 (2015), the United States Supreme Court ruled last week that the North Carolina Dental Board, which is comprised mainly of practicing dentists, was not...more
On February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court of the United States held that the North Carolina Dental Board (“Board”) was not insulated from federal antitrust liability under the so-called “state action” doctrine when it engaged...more
On February 18, 2015, American Express lost its court battle with the Department of Justice's Antitrust Division over the card's Non-Discrimination Provisions ("NDPs"), which prohibited merchants from steering customers to...more
On Wednesday, February 25, 2015, the Supreme Court released a 6-3 decision in North Carolina Board of Dental Examiners v. Federal Trade Commission, a case with potentially broad implications for regulation by dental and...more
In a ruling with significant implications for state professional licensing boards and their members, on February 25, 2015, the United States Supreme Court found that practitioner-controlled state boards do not have inherent...more
After a seven-week bench trial in an enforcement action by the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) and 17 state attorneys general, U.S. District Judge Garaufis (Eastern District of New York) held that American Express Co.’s...more
On February 25, 2015, the U.S. Supreme Court determined that the North Carolina State Board of Dental Examiners (“Dental Board”) is not shielded from federal antitrust law under the doctrine of state-action antitrust...more