Keller and Heckman LLP’s Post

As we like to say around our shop, "don't sleep on IP!" Having the right IP strategy in place not only leads to long term business value, it can also have a significant impact on a purchase or sale transaction. Check out this blog by my brilliant colleagues Nicolas A. Joubert and Eric Buettner on how to avoid IP-related deal complications and rising fees in M&A transactions.

Some canapé before the D-day designation of gatekeepers. Samuel Stolton dug into the minutes between the (potential) gatekeepers and the Commission—it's crunchy. As I said in the article, I expect firms to challenge the designation, but not when it is obvious they reach the thresholds. Also, I am excited about whether 1) some firms tried to rebut the presumption (I guess, yes), 2) the Commission opened a market investigation because firms did not notify, and 3) the length of the designation's decision. Note that after September 6, gatekeepers will have the obligation to inform the Commission of all their intended acquisitions in the digital sector (and in 6 months, they will have to comply with the list of positive and negative obligations). Will we see Member States trying to challenge lots of non-notifiable weddings? (I hope the merger unit enjoyed the summer break)

𝐃𝐨𝐉 𝐝𝐨𝐞𝐬 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐚 𝐬𝐮𝐛𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐨𝐫 𝐰𝐢𝐧𝐧𝐚𝐛𝐥𝐞 𝐜𝐚𝐬𝐞 𝐯𝐬 𝐋𝐢𝐯𝐞 𝐍𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 - 𝐚𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐲𝐬𝐭𝐬 The U.S. Justice Department, along with a coalition of states, is set to file an antitrust lawsuit against entertainment powerhouse #LiveNation. The legal challenge, to be lodged in a federal court in New York, accuses the company of abusing its ticketing monopoly to stifle competition. The suit calls for substantial changes in Live Nation's operations, specifically requesting a court order to reverse its 2010 merger with #Ticketmaster, a consolidation that was previously greenlit during the Obama administration despite monopoly concerns. The antitrust scrutiny comes as Live Nation holds a dominant position in the live entertainment sector, with at least a 50% share in concert promotion. "We expect LYV to vigorously defend itself against this lawsuit. Our view also remains unchanged that the DOJ does not have a substantive or winnable case (based on precedent and the facts)," Guggenheim analyst Curry B. said. "We remain adamant that any targeted unwinding of the 2010 Live Nation Ticketmaster merger likely has only a remote likelihood under accepted antitrust law although we would be wary of the likely initial New York State Federal Court venue," Benchmark analyst Matthew Harrigan wrote.

T-Mobile US faces antitrust case over Sprint buy T-Mobile US was ordered to face a lawsuit over its acquisition of Sprint in 2020, as a US judge sided with AT&T and Verizon subscribers who filed a class action arguing the deal hurt competition and led to increased prices. The case was filed by seven AT&T or Verizon subscribers on behalf of millions of consumers who the claimants say were impacted by the $26 billion deal. Plaintiffs described the deal as “one of the most anti-competitive” in history and called for a range of penalties, including an undoing of the takeover. A judge found plaintiffs had plausibly argued higher prices in the US market “flowed directly” from completion of the deal, showing the reduction in competition resulted in AT&T and Verizon charging “higher prices than they would have otherwise”. AT&T and Verizon are not directly involved in the case. T-Mobile’s legal team described the class action as unprecedented and speculative. Reuters reported the team argued consumers should “switch to T-Mobile, not sue it” because they are dissatisfied with its rivals pricing. T-Mobile made numerous commitments around pricing, competition and jobs to alleviate competition concerns.

King's speech confirmed that the Digital Markets Competition and Consumer Bill is indeed going ahead. Which means fundamental changes to consumer protection and competition law. Katherine Kirrage Emily Tombs Chloe Deng Nick Johnson Simon Neill and I have created some videos on what this might mean in practice #consumerprotection #regulatorycompliance

A Live Nation investor has sued board members, including the CEO and CFO, following the US Department of Justice's (DoJ) antitrust lawsuit against the company. The suit also names Oak View Group's CEO, alleging collusion. The DoJ accuses Live Nation and its Ticketmaster subsidiary of anti-competitive practices and seeks to force Live Nation to sell Ticketmaster. The investor claims the legal action will harm shareholders, blaming board members for continuing anti-competitive conduct despite a consent decree. The lawsuit also alleges the board misled shareholders about cooperating with federal investigators and colluded with Oak View Group to avoid competition. Live Nation denies all allegations. https://lnkd.in/gTHcZABm #LiveNation #livemusic

Interested in what Q1 2024 had to offer in the field of competition law? You can read it in our new Competition Flashback! Anything from merger updates to follow-on cartel damages claims and state aid, both in the Netherlands and the EU #competition #enforcement #commission #damages #mergers

DOJ lawsuit against Apple is headline grabber with limited near-term impact The U.S. Department of Justice filed a suit against Apple Thursday, accusing the institution led by CEO Tim Cook of engaging successful anti-competitive concern practices. The allegations see claims that Apple prevents competitors from accessing definite iPhone features and that the company’s actions interaction the “flow of speech” done its streaming service, Apple TV+. However, adjacent if the DOJ proves immoderate of the allegations, it is highly improbable that Apple volition look worldly changes for years, arsenic past shows that specified lawsuits often instrumentality a important magnitude of clip to scope a resolution. The DOJ’s ongoing lawsuit against Google, filed successful 2020, lone went to proceedings successful 2023, with nary remedies oregon fiscal implications expected for up to 2 much years. This is not the archetypal clip Apple has faced ineligible enactment from the DOJ. In 2012, the bureau sued Apple for conspiring with publishers to summation ebook prices, a suit that was not settled until 2016. “Precedents suggest that solution of the ailment volition instrumentality 3 to 5 years, including appeals,” Bernstein analysts wrote successful a note. Morgan Stanley analysts said Friday that the existent suit could besides favour Apple, arsenic galore akin allegations person already been ruled connected by a justice successful the Apple vs Epic case, with the ruling stating that Apple does not interruption antitrust laws. The DOJ filing besides made small to nary notation of Apple’s lucrative hunt woody with Google and did not mention the App Store arsenic 1 of its 5 main examples of monopolistic behavior. Previous large antitrust cases. (Image: Bernstein) Bernstein analysts added, “While the DoJ’s charges are focused connected iPhone, we bash not spot apt remediation arsenic materially impacting Apple financially oregon undermining the iPhone franchise: worst case, Apple pays a fine, and loosens restrictions for contention crossed the iOS platform, which we judge volition person constricted interaction connected iPhone idiosyncratic retention oregon connected Services revenues.” Which led Morgan Stanley analysts to reason that the DOJ’s suit creates “more of a header hazard than a near-term lawsuit risk” for Apple. They added: Said differently, yes, this suit creates a banal overhang, but the marketplace has a abbreviated word representation and successful our view, fundamentals are much apt to thrust Apple’s banal terms implicit the adjacent 12 months (and respective years), alternatively than this lawsuit. We tin mention a fig of humanities instances wherever companies successful the heavy of litigation threatening their halfway product/differentiating worth proposition person out...

[Hybe likely to join FTC’s antitrust watch list] With total assets exceeding 5 trillion won, BTS agency subject to tighter disclosure rules HYBE, the powerhouse behind K-pop sensation BTS, is poised to claim the "large firm" status, with its total assets passing beyond the 5 trillion won ($3.7 billion) mark last year. According to the company's regulatory filings, Hybe's total assets stood at 5.35 trillion won by the end of last year, marking a 9.8 percent increase from the 4.87 trillion won tallied in 2022. This milestone heralds a groundbreaking achievement as the first K-pop company to enter the esteemed "5 trillion won club." Every year, the Fair Trade Commission designates businesses with total assets exceeding 5 trillion won as "large corporations," that are subject to tighter disclosure rules and other antitrust regulations. The watchdog also designates a "same person," typically the head of the large firms, following a thorough assessment of their direct and indirect shareholding ratio and their overall corporate control within the business group. Additionally, the same person and their family are subject to asset disclosure and regulations concerning their involvement in the business. Tap below to read full story. #HYBE #FTC #antitrust #corporate #firm #shareholding #FairTradeCommission #business #BTS https://lnkd.in/g7649xYi

I continue to find it utterly bizarre that while agencies on both sides of the Atlantic apply increasingly close antitrust scrutiny to the activities of BigTech companies, they give those same businesses everything they want when it comes to hollowing out the patent system. If regulators and policy makers took a step back, they would see similar patterns in both areas. The motives that drive anti-competitive behaviour are the same as those that underpin advocacy to weaken the enforcement of patent rights - a desire to concentrate ever greater market power and wealth in the hands of those who already possess far more of both than anyone else. Maybe one day the dots will be connected but until that happens much of the antitrust scrutiny BigTech companies now face will be rendered meaningless by what they gain from the weakening of other people's IP. Those with deep pockets will pay billions of dollars or euros in fines all day long if they get carte blanche to co-opt third party inventions with next to no risk.