Pan­gloss Responds”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Texas Law Review See Also
2009

Bar­gain­ing in the Shad­ow of Rate-Set­t­ing Courts”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Antitrust Law Journal
2009

lin­kLine’s Insti­tu­tion­al Suspicions”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Cato Supreme Court Review
2009

Can Bun­dled Dis­count­ing Increase Con­sumer Prices With­out Exclud­ing Rivals?”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Com­pe­ti­tion Pol­i­cy International
2009

Chica­go, Post-Chi­ca­­go, and Neo-Chicago”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Uni­ver­si­ty of Chica­go Law Review
2009

Pri­vate Enforce­ment against Inter­na­tion­al Car­tels in Latin Amer­i­ca: A US Perspective”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Com­pe­ti­tion Law and Pol­i­cy in Latin America
2009

Oba­ma’s Antitrust Agenda”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Reg­u­la­tion
2009

Intel­lec­tu­al Liability”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Texas Law Review
2009

Sub­stance, Pro­ce­dure, and Insti­tu­tions in the Inter­na­tion­al Har­mo­niza­tion of Com­pe­ti­tion Policy”

  • Intel­lec­tu­al Prop­er­ty and Antitrust
Chica­go Jour­nal of Inter­na­tion­al Law
2009