“Damages for Exclusionary Bundled Discounts”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Antitrust Bulletin
2006

“The Paradox of Predatory Pricing”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Cornell Law Review
2005

“Harmful Output in the Antitrust Domain: Lessons from the Tobacco Industry”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Georgia Law Review
2005

“Multiproduct Discounting A Myth of Nonprice Predation”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
University of Chicago Law Review
2005

“The Perverse Effects of Predatory Pricing Law”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Regulation
2005

“Ease Over Accuracy in Assessing Patent Settlements”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Minnesota Law Review
2004

“Exit Payments in Settlement of Patent Infringement Lawsuits: Antitrust Rules and Economic Implications”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Florida Law Review
2002

“Antitrust Settlements”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Settlement Agreements in Commercial Disputes Negotiating, Drafting and Enforcement
2000

“Faith, Reason, and Bare Animosity”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Campbell Law Review
1999

“Beyond RFRA: Free Exercise of Religion Comes of Age in the State Courts”

St Thomas Law Review
1998

“The Original Understanding of the ‘Effects Clause’ of Article IV, Section 1 and Implications for the Defense of Marriage Act”

George Mason Law Review
1998

“From the Commerce Clause to Cafe Cubano: The Constitutionality of Helms-Burton”

Latin American Law and Business Report
1996

“[Comments] A Poor Relation? Regulatory Takings after Dolan v City of Tigard”

University of Chicago Law Review
1996

“Fascism and Monopoly”

  • Intellectual Property and Antitrust
Michigan Law Review

“Tying Law for the Digital Age”

Notre Dame Law Review

“Antitrust After the Coming Wave”

NYU Law Review

“Defining Relevant Markets in Digital Ecosystems”

Journal of Law & Innovation

“The American Antimonopoly Tradition: Origins, Contradictions, Transformations”

NYU Journal of Law & Business

“The Radical Challenge to the Antitrust Order”

Wake Forest Law Review