RTP's Fourth Branch Podcast

On October 20, 2020, the Department of Justice (DOJ) filed its much-anticipated lawsuit against Google. The case is the most high-profile antitrust challenge since the Microsoft case more than 20 years ago. The Justice Department has alleged that Google monopolized the search and search advertising markets, inhibiting rivals such as Bing, DuckDuckGo, and Yahoo from succeeding and thereby ultimately harming competition and consumers. This distinguished panel debated the merits of the DOJ's antitrust claims, discussed the potential parallels to the Microsoft action, and opined on the government's likelihood of success at trial.

Featuring:
- Geoffrey A. Manne, President and Founder, International Center for Law & Economics
- A. Douglas Melamed, Professor of the Practice of Law, Stanford Law School
- Christopher L. Sagers, James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law, Cleveland-Marshall College of Law
- [Moderator] Brianna S. Hills, Associate, Boies Schiller Flexner LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On October 28, 2020 the Federalist Society's Akron Student Chapter hosted George Horvath and Adam Mossoff for a discussion of how patents can affect medical innovation. Specifically, the two discussed how patents have already come into play in the response to COVID-19, and how they will continue to do so as the fight against the pandemic evolves.
Featuring:

George Horvath, Assistant Professor of Law, University of Akron School of Law
Adam Mossoff, Professor of Law, Antonin Scalia Law School, George Mason University
[Moderator] Camilla Hrdy, Associate Professor of Law, University of Akron School of Law



Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Recent disputes between the United States and China have focused on trade, but perhaps the most potent trade-related issue is not tangible products but intangible property. China's policies and practices involving intellectual property reveal a plan for luring investment and innovation to China for economic advantage.

On this live podcast, world-renowned experts in intellectual property and China's policies discuss whether this constitutes a violation of international norms, and what, if anything, the United States should be doing about it.

Featuring:
- Mark Cohen, Director and Senior Fellow, Berkeley Center for Law and Technology, University of California at Berkeley
- Hon. Paul R. Michel, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit
- Hon. Randall R. Rader, Chief Judge (ret.), U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit and Honorary Professor, Tsinghua University
- [Moderator] Brian O'Shaughnessy, Partner, Dinsmore & Shohl LLP

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Data portability has been a hot topic of late, from GDPR to CCPA to the FTC's recent Data to Go Workshop. To some, data portability is a consumer right to access and move individual data. For others, data portability means the sharing of larger swaths of data with other services and platforms to lower entry barriers to effective competition.

Although both forms of portability aim to enhance consumer welfare and increase competition, data portability raises a host of issues, such as privacy protection, data security, and intellectual property rights. Additionally, there is evidence that data portability mandates, when used as a competition remedy, is costly, ineffective, and may reduce business incentives, and could entrench incumbents by making it difficult for smaller competitors to change their services and modernize their products.

This comes as many competition agencies and legislatures alike are considering interoperability and data portability mandates to increase competition. And, Congress is set to release a report with recommendations for reducing the market power of online platforms, which may include these mandates.

The Regulatory Transparency Project explored the hot topic of data portability over the course of a two-part virtual panel series entitled, "Data Portability Mandates, Consumer Privacy Protections, and Competition Law." The first panel discussed the consumer protection and privacy implications of data portability, and this panel turned to the use of portability and interoperability mandates in competition law.

Featuring:
- Jay Ezrielev, Founder and Managing Principal, Elevecon LLC
- Bruce Hoffman, Partner, Cleary Gottlieb Steen & Hamilton LLP
- Alex Petros, Policy Counsel, Public Knowledge
- [Moderator] Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice

Visit our website – www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The creators of the award-winning documentary, They Say It Can't Be Done, in partnership with the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, present It Can Be Done Live — a conversation between entrepreneurs, regulatory experts, and noted academics around creative and bipartisan solutions to global challenges to our shared future. The last of four panel events, It Can Be Done Live: The Future of Our Food, took place on October 1st, 2020.

Over the next 30 years, our global population is expected to grow by more than 2 billion people to 9 billion people inhabiting this planet. How will we feed a rapidly growing population with decreased land and water resources and increased attention to animal welfare and the environment? Is that even possible? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- John Mackey, Co-Founder and CEO, Whole Foods Market
- Sonny Perdue, Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture
- Josh Tetrick, Co-Founder and CEO, Eat Just, Inc.
- [Moderator] Anastasia P. Boden, Attorney, Economic Liberty Project, Pacific Legal Foundation

Visit our website — www.RegProject.org — to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Data portability has been a hot topic of late, from GDPR to CCPA to the FTC’s recent Data to Go Workshop. To some, data portability is a consumer right to access and move individual data. For others, data portability means the sharing of larger swaths of data with other services and platforms to lower entry barriers to effective competition.

Although both forms of portability aim to enhance consumer welfare and increase competition, data portability raises a host of issues, such as privacy protection, data security, and intellectual property rights. Additionally, there is evidence that data portability mandates, when used as a competition remedy, is costly, ineffective, and may reduce business incentives, and could entrench incumbents by making it difficult for smaller competitors to change their services and modernize their products.

This comes as many competition agencies and legislatures alike are considering interoperability and data portability mandates to increase competition. And, Congress is set to release a report with recommendations for reducing the market power of online platforms, which may include these mandates.

The Regulatory Transparency Project explored the hot topic of data portability over the course of a two-part virtual panel series entitled, "Data Portability Mandates, Consumer Privacy Protections, and Competition Law." This panel discussed the consumer protection and privacy implications of data portability, and the second panel turned to the use of portability and interoperability mandates in competition law.

Featuring:
- Peter Swire, Elizabeth and Thomas Holder Chair and Professor of Law and Ethics, Scheller College of Business, Georgia Institute of Technology
- Liad Wagman, Professor of Economics, Stuart School of Business, Illinois Institute of Technology
- Gabriela Zanfir-Fortuna, Senior Counsel, Future of Privacy Forum
- [Moderator] Svetlana Gans, Vice President & Associate General Counsel, NCTA

Visit our website –www.RegProject.org – to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

In this episode, Jennifer Huddleston and Ashkhen Kazaryan break down the recent news related to Section 230 of the Communications Decency Act, including Justice Clarence Thomas's statement, controversy over Twitter and Facebook's moderation practices, and FCC Chairman Ajit Pai's announcement on rulemaking related to the law.

Featuring:
- Jennifer Huddleston, Director of Technology and Innovation Policy, American Action Forum
- Ashkhen Kazaryan, Director of Civil Liberties, TechFreedom

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

The creators of the award-winning documentary, They Say It Can't Be Done, in partnership with the Federalist Society's Regulatory Transparency Project, present It Can Be Done Live - a conversation between entrepreneurs, regulatory experts, and noted academics around creative and bipartisan solutions to global challenges to our shared future. The third of four panel events, It Can Be Done Live: The Future of Our Earth, took place on September 24th, 2020.

By 2050, 9 billion humans will share this planet and how we protect it is one of the most important questions of our time. How will we ensure that we can adapt to a changing climate, that we will all have access to clean air and fresh water, and that habitats are protected? While these goals have notable public support, reasonable people differ on the best methods to protect the environment. Are there more effective and less burdensome ways to accomplish these vital goals? The panelists explored the potential of human ingenuity to solve these problems and the conditions necessary to make those solutions a reality. We say it can be done.

Featuring:
- James W. Coleman, Associate Professor of Law, Southern Methodist University Dedman School of Law
- David Doniger, Director, Climate & Clean Air Program, Natural Resources Defense Council
- Charles Hernick, Vice President of Policy and Advocacy, Citizens for Responsible Energy Solutions
- Andrew Wheeler, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
- [Moderator] Susan Dudley, Director, Regulatory Studies Center and Distinguished Professor of Practice, Trachtenberg School of Public Policy & Public Administration, George Washington University

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

On October 7, 2020, the Federalist Society's Pennsylvania Student Chapter and the Regulatory Transparency Project co-sponsored an event on "Antitrust Populism and the Conservative Movement."

During the 1986 Supreme Court confirmation hearings for then-Judge Antonin Scalia, he was asked about his views on antitrust. "In law school, I never understood [antitrust law]," Scalia explained, "I later found out, in reading the writings of those who now do understand it, that I should not have understood it because it did not make any sense then." Some contend that the much-needed coherency in antitrust law was brought about by the Chicago School revolution and the adoption of the consumer welfare standard.

Today, Robert Bork's consumer welfare paradigm faces challenges. Antitrust law is back at a political crossroads, with both sides calling for a politicized approach to address problems such as anti-conservative bias, economic and racial inequality, and a whole host of other issues, while focusing on slogans and labels rather than relevant economic and legal questions. Additionally, some experts argue that the economic consequences of many of the recent proposals would make the American economy and consumers substantially worse off across a wide array of industries. At the same time, today's antitrust debate underscores some interesting rifts and tension within both political parties, serving as an interesting microcosm of broader political dynamics.

Featuring:
-Ashley Baker, Director of Public Policy, Committee for Justice
-Herbert Hovenkamp, James G. Dinan University Professor, University of Pennsylvania Carey Law School

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.

Recent weeks have been chock-full of headlines regarding antitrust and big tech companies, from the House Judiciary Antitrust Subcommittee report to the Senate Commerce Committee subpoenas of top CEOs. In this episode, Neil Chilson breaks down these recent developments and discusses how they fit into the broader picture of antitrust law in the United States.

Featuring:
- Neil Chilson, Senior Research Fellow for Technology and Innovation, Charles Koch Institute

Visit our website - www.RegProject.org - to learn more, view all of our content, and connect with us on social media.