Zephyr Teachout Quotes

I mean, I don't think the Facebook merger with WhatsApp and Instagram should have been approved. But I'm not for reflexively breaking up tech companies.

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

I have the most profound respect for the Department of Justice and the FTC. We in Europe are a younger and I would say junior institution to the historical antitrust experience of the US.

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.

Amazon is not a monopoly or a monopsony, and even if it were, that by itself isn't illegal.

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.

The antitrust litigation currently in the federal courts in the U.S. against Monsanto will be the test case in the life sciences, just as the Microsoft case was the test case in the information sciences.

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

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.

We need to pressure lawmakers to hold hearings on pending mergers, and pressure federal and state enforcers to use their full powers.

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

I have a very strong tool in competitional enforcement: To do merger control, to look into cartels, misuse of dominant position - when member states hand out favors, for instance, in terms of tax breaks. But even though that's a strong tool, it cannot solve everything.

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.

I'm for strong antitrust enforcement.

The mere possession of monopoly power, and the concomitant charging of monopoly prices, is not only not unlawful, it is an important element of the free-market system. The opportunity to charge monopoly prices - at least for a short period - is what attracts 'business acumen' in the first place; it induces risk taking that produces innovation and economic growth.

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

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.

Monopolies are bad and deserve their reputation when things are static and the monopolies function as toll collectors... But I think they're quite positive when they're dynamic and do something new.

I think the touchstone is to give consumers a full, fair choice without the power of a monopoly operating system pushing them in a direction that free competition might or might not achieve.

Intel continues... to abuse their monopoly, and that's why, around the world, governments and regulatory agencies continue to go after them.

I can't deny that some customers and prospects think it's the key to our future. But it's not. We're certainly supportive of the Dept. of Justice and the 20 states that have brought this action.

As someone with a deep faith in competition and the market, I also know that markets only work with tough enforcement of the rules that guarantee competition and fair play - and that the pressure to break those rules only gets stronger as the amount of money involved gets larger.

Everybody agrees that you want competition. But you have to have rules of fair competition if you want to have competitors to enter the market.

I talked about the barriers created by monopolies. I said that it was the role of government to break up these monopolies and that we couldn't do it alone.

The only way you can stop the unregulated monopoly ... from gouging ... is to introduce competition.