Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section
News from the Section
- The Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section of the State Bar of California is pleased to honor Paul R. Griffin as the 2016 Antitrust Lawyer of the Year
- Antitrust and UCL in the News
- Webinar: A Hands-On Review of a Telecommunications Merger Challenge, Thursday, March 3, 2016, 12 noon - 1:30 p.m.
- Register Now! Cybersecurity Symposium: How to Navigate the Complexities Found at the Intersections of Cybersecurity, Corporate Governance and Government Regulations, Tuesday, March 8, 2016 at Stanford
- Save the Date! 26th Annual Golden State Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Law Institute & Antitrust Lawyer of the Year Reception — November 3, 2016
- Third Circuit Revives In Part Google Cookie Placement Litigation
- Court in Cox Tying Case Overturns $6.3 Million Jury Verdict
- Antitrust Case Against Golden State Warriors and Ticketmaster Dismissed for Failure to Allege a Cognizable Relevant Product Market
- Revised Antitrust Treatise! California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, Revised Edition
The Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section of the State Bar of California is pleased to honor Paul R. Griffin as the 2016 Antitrust Lawyer of the Year
The award will be given at the 2016 Golden State Institute, Thursday, November 3, 2016, in San Francisco.
Paul Griffin, a “San Francisco Tier 1 antitrust lawyer,” according to U. S. News & World Report, is a partner in Winston & Strawn’s San Francisco office. Paul is part of the Winston antitrust group which was awarded “2015 Team of the Year” in Cartel Defense by The Legal 500 and is “Highly Recommended” by Global Competition Review. Before joining Winston where he has served as global antitrust Co-Chair, he served as Chair and Vice Chair of the antitrust practices at the Pillsbury and Thelen firms, respectively.
For more information, see Antitrust Lawyer of the Year.
Webinar: A Hands-On Review of a Telecommunications Merger Challenge
Thursday, March 3, 2016, 12 noon - 1:30 p.m.
This program offers 1.5 hours of participatory MCLE credit. You must register in advance in order to partcipate.
Mergers in the cable and internet industries are making antitrust headlines almost daily. This webinar will walk through a hypothetical telecommunications merger from initial regulatory filings through an FTC challenge and related proceedings. Our panelists will address both the practical aspects of responding to such a challenge, as well as some of the key substantive law issues that are frequently at play in these matters. Our panelists will offer insights, drawn from both private practitioner and enforcer backgrounds, that will benefit the seasoned merger practitioner as well as those interested in learning some of the basics in this area.
Moderator: Craig Waldman
- Jamillia Ferris
- Ryan Tisch
Cybersecurity Symposium: How to Navigate the Complexities Found at the Intersections of Cybersecurity, Corporate Governance and Government Regulations
Presented by the Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Seection in collaboration with The Stanford Cyber Initiative
Tuesday, March 8, 2016
Registration: 3:30 p.m. - 4 p.m.
Panel Presentation: 4 p.m. - 5 p.m.
Networking Reception Location: 5 p.m. - 6:30 p.m.
MacKenzie Board Room
Jen-Hsun Huang Engineering Center
475 Via Ortega
Stanford, CA 94305
Earn 1 Hour MCLE Credit
- Paul Luehr, Stroz Friedberg
- Sabrina Ross, Senior Counsel for Privacy, Uber
- Jacob Russell, Lecturer and Fellow in Corporate Governance, Stanford Law School
- Thomas Dahdouh, Director, Federal Trade Commission
- Dr. Allison Berke, Executive Director, Stanford Cyber Initiative
- Joanne McNabb, Director of Privacy Education and Policy, Ca. Dept. of Justice
Moderator: Magistrate Judge Paul Singh Grewal, United States District Court, Northern District of California
You can now REGISTER ONLINE for this program. For more information, see Cybersecurity Symposium.
Save the Date! 26th Annual Golden State Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Law Institute & Antitrust Lawyer of the Year Reception and Dinner
Presented by The State Bar of California Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section
November 3, 2016
The Julia Morgan Ballroom
Merchant Exchange Bldg., 15th Floor
465 California Street
San Francisco, CA
More details will be provide at Golden State Institute when the date draws nearer.
Third Circuit Revives In Part Google Cookie Placement Litigation
By Thomas N. Dahdouh
Regional Director, Western Region, FTC
Views expressed herein are solely and completely the personal views of the author only and do not necessarily reflect those of the Commission or any Commissioner.
Following closely on the heels of its reinvigoration of the FTC’s lawsuit against Wyndham for privacy violations, Federal Trade Commission v. Wyndham Worldwide Corp., 799 F.3d 236, (3d Cir. 2015), the Third Circuit in In re: Google Inc. Cookie Placement Consumer Privacy Litigation, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 19581 (3d Cir. Del. Nov. 10, 2015) has once again revived a privacy violation lawsuit that had been dismissed by the district court. Although the court dismissed the three federal law counts and the California UCL count, it upheld plaintiffs’ standing against a broad-brush assault and reinstated plaintiffs’ counts alleging violations of the California Constitution’s protections of privacy, as well as California tort law. The decision, though, may be further adversely affected by a pending Supreme Court decision. Read more.
Court in Cox Tying Case Overturns $6.3 Million Jury Verdict
Jason M. Bussey
On November 12, 2015, Judge Robin J. Cauthron of the Western District of Oklahoma granted defendant Cox Communications, Inc.’s (“Cox’s”) motion for judgment as a matter of law, holding that the jury in that case—which had found for the plaintiff on its tying claim following an eight day trial—lacked a legally sufficient evidentiary basis to do so. In re Cox Enterprises, Inc. Set-Top Cable Television Box Antitrust Litig. (Healy), No. 12-2048 (W.D. Okla. Nov. 12, 2015).
The case involved Cox’s practice of renting set-top boxes (“STBs”) to digital cable subscribers for a monthly fee. In 2009, Cox subscribers in various jurisdictions sued Cox on behalf of a putative nationwide class, claiming its rental practices violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act. Specifically, plaintiffs alleged that Cox both conditioned the sale of its digital cable services on the customer’s rental of an STB and effectively precluded customers from renting or otherwise obtaining STBs from third parties. As a result, they claimed, Cox tied its cable services to STB rentals, restrained competition in the STB market, and forced plaintiffs to pay more for STBs than they would absent the tie. Read more.
Antitrust Case Against Golden State Warriors and Ticketmaster Dismissed for Failure to Allege a Cognizable Relevant Product Market
Robert Freitas and Rachel Kinney
Freitas Angell & Weinberg LLP
In StubHub, Inc v. Golden State Warriors, LLC, No. 15-1436, 2015 WL 6755594 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 5, 2015), ticket reseller StubHub asserted five federal claims and three state claims against the Golden State Warriors and Ticketmaster. StubHub alleged that the defendants violated Section 1 of the Sherman Act by engaging in: (1) illegal tying “by mandating that persons who purchase primary Warriors tickets cannot resell them other than through Ticketmaster,” (2) “a series of coordinated agreements and acts to limit competition;” and (3) exclusive dealing. 2015 WL 6755594, at *2. StubHub also alleged that the defendants violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act “by entering into a conspiracy to monopolize the Secondary Ticket Services Market” and “by attempting to monopolize the Secondary Ticket Services Market.” Id. The state law claims alleged violations of the Cartwright Act and Business and Professions Code Section 17200, and interference with prospective economic advantage. Id. at *4. Read more.
California Antitrust and Unfair Competition Law, Revised Edition
Cheryl Lee Johnson, Editor-in-Chief
Gain authoritative understanding of California antitrust and unfair competition statutes, policies and issues with one-volume convenience. This treatise brings you up to speed on everything from horizontal combinations and vertical restraints to public enforcement of California antitrust laws and trial considerations.
You get full coverage of The Cartwright Act along with related California consumer and unfair competition laws, and how they apply to the health industry, regulated industries, the labor market, electronic media, the internet and other fields. Additionally, there are chapters covering damages, defenses to liability including exemptions and immunities, injunctive relief, class actions, attorney’s fees and costs, insurance issues, and much more. This publication includes contributions from over 120 highly experienced antitrust practitioners in both the private and government sectors, as well as the executive members of the Antitrust, UCL and Privacy Section of the California State Bar.
$260, 1 volume, loose-leaf, updated annually, Pub. #01577, ISBN 9780769856896
To order, call 800-223-1940 or visit the LexisNexis Store.
Antitrust & Unfair Competition Section
The State Bar of California
180 Howard Street
San Francisco, CA 94105-1639