9th Circuit opinion in Qualcomm is a pretty complete rebuke of D.Ct. Good to see. Biggest surprise remains the D.Ct opinion, not rejection of it. 1/

The opinion's holding that Qualcomm's conduct didn't fit w/in any of the Aspen Skiing exclusions was the low hanging fruit. More important is court's recognition that antitrust is bad tool for addressing contract disputes, 2/

including noting the "persuasive policy arguments of several academics ... express[ing] caution about using the antitrust laws to remedy what are essentially contractual disputes between private parties." 3/

A good Coasean cite to Tennis & Schwab (explaining how “antitrust economists, and in turn lawyers and judges, tend to treat novel products or business practices as anticompetitive” and “are likely to decide cases wrongly in rapidly changing dynamic markets"). 4/

And, of course, good cites to @ProfWrightGMU (including work with @geoffmanne). 5/

It seems pretty likely that several amicus briefs, including from @LawEconCenter, were useful and elided into the comment about "persuasive policy arguments from several academics." 6/

In any event, good, if unsurprising, opinion. Biggest surprise to me remains the D.Ct's very problematic opinion.

Which, I guess, raises the question whether this will be appealed to S.Ct. As with AT&T/TW, it's a big loss, but an appeal would risk an even bigger loss. 7/7

Sorry! Should have linked to the opinion!

https://cdn.ca9.uscourts.gov/datastore/opinions/2020/08/11/19-16122.pdf

8/7

And also, this! @LawEconCenter's symposium on the case was, and continues to be, essential reading!

https://twitter.com/geoffmanne/status/1293230246578155520

9/7