Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Federal Trade Commission v. Qualcomm Incorporated [1] was a noted American antitrust case, in which the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) accused Qualcomm's licensing agreements as anticompetitive, mainly because their practices excluded competition and harmed competitors in the modern chip market, which according to the FTC, violated both Section 1 and Section 2 of the Sherman Act.
FTC v. Actavis, Inc., 570 U.S. 136 (2013), was a United States Supreme Court decision in which the Court held that the FTC could make an antitrust challenge under the rule of reason against a so-called pay-for-delay agreement, also referred to as a reverse payment patent settlement.
The Federal Trade Commission said that Meta's actions prevent consumers from enjoying the benefits of competition. [ 5 ] On December 8, 2020, the Federal Trade Commission , along with 46 US states (all excluding Alabama , Georgia , South Carolina , and South Dakota ), the District of Columbia and the territory of Guam , launched the antitrust ...
Federal Trade Commission, 574 U.S. 494 (2015), was a United States Supreme Court case on the scope of immunity from US antitrust law. The Supreme Court held that a state occupational licensing board that was primarily composed of persons active in the market it regulates has immunity from antitrust law only when it is actively supervised by the ...
Meta Platforms cannot delay the U.S. Federal Trade Commission from reopening a probe into alleged privacy failures by its Facebook unit while the company pursues a lawsuit challenging the agency's ...
The Federal Trade Commission issued the rule in August banning the sale or purchase of online reviews. The rule, which went into effect Monday, allows the agency to seek civil penalties against ...
The investigation marks another high-profile effort to rein in technology companies by the FTC's progressive chair, Lina Khan, days after the agency suffered a big loss in court in its fight to ...
United States v. Google Inc., No. 3:12-cv-04177 (N.D. Cal. Nov. 16, 2012), is a case in which the United States District Court for the Northern District of California approved a stipulated order for a permanent injunction and a $22.5 million civil penalty judgment, the largest civil penalty the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) has ever won in history. [1]