J. A. Konrath Quotes

You won't get sued for anticompetitive behavior.

We seek the definite end of preventing combinations in furtherance of monopoly and in restraint of trade

Adequate relief in a monopolization case should put an end to the combination and deprive the defendants of any of the benefits of the illegal conduct, and break up or render impotent the monopoly power found to be in violation of the Act.

There are certain agreements or practices which because of their pernicious effect on competition and lack of any redeeming virtue are conclusively …. Among the practices which the courts have heretofore deemed to be unlawful in and of themselves are price fixing, division of markets, group boycotts, and tying arrangements.

All the authorities agree that in order to vitiate a contract or combination it is not essential that its result should be a complete monopoly; it is sufficient if it really tends to that end and to deprive the public of the advantages which flow from free competition.

Antitrust is the way that the government promotes markets when there are market failures. It has nothing to do with the idea of free information.

I think we need to have stronger antitrust enforcement.

Who can complain about the price that Google is charging you? Or who can complain about Amazon's prices; they are simply lower than the competition's. And that's why I think we need to shift back to a more Brandeisian conception of antitrust, where we consider values other than simply efficiency and low prices.

As freak legislation, the antitrust laws stand alone. Nobody knows what it is they forbid.

Changing technologies, changing marketplaces, and even changing trends in anti-competitive practices have all presented challenges to antitrust enforcement.

Vigilant and effective antitrust enforcement today is preferable to the heavy hand of government regulation of the Internet tomorrow.

it shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce … to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce.

The holder of a monopoly is a sinner and offender.

Regulation is often a way to keep a dominant firm in place.

From search and books to online TV and operating systems, antitrust affects our daily digital lives in more ways than we think.

It's not in my mission to work against Euroskepticism; it's my mission to work for fair markets. In antitrust, what is at stake is, in some ways, as old as Adam and Eve because it is about greed, to get more.

Dominant companies can't abuse their position to create advantage in related markets.

If a company is not a monopoly, then the law assumes market competition can restrain the company's actions. No problem. If a monopoly exists, but the monopoly does not engage in acts designed to destroy competition, then we can assume that it earned and is keeping its monopoly the pro-consumer way: by out-innovating its competitors.

The Antitrust Division of the United States Department of Justice should take a long, hard look at the standard publishing contract.

Antitrust law isn't about protecting competing businesses from each other, it's about protecting competition itself on behalf of the public.

Like other antitrust agencies we make our assessment of a merger or antitrust case based on its impact on our jurisdiction, and not on the nationality of the companies. This is exactly what the U.S. antitrust agencies, the Justice Department and the FTC, do.

Anticompetitive practices hurt Chinese private firms nearly as much as foreign ones.

The one thing that I know government is good for is countervailing against monopoly. It's not great at that either, but it's the only force I know that is fairly reliable.

The economy is governed through cartel agreements and monopoly. The attorney general is the one who's controlling funds. There is no free business in Georgia.

The standard formulation on remedy is that it ought to cure past violations and prevent their recurrence. That's what antitrust is all about.