Antitrust

In Pacific Bell Telephone Co. v. Linkline Communications, Inc., 129 S. Ct. 1109 (2009), the Supreme Court of the United States rejected a price squeeze claim under § 2 of the Sherman Act asserted by four Internet service providers (ISPs) against AT&T over its retail prices for digital subscriber line (DSL) access.  Under the conditions of a merger with BellSouth, AT&T was required by the FCC to continue to provide wholesale DSL transport service to independent ISPs at a price that did not exceed its own retail price for DSL service.  In re AT&T Inc. and BellSouth Corp., 22 FCC Rcd. 5662, 5814 (2007). 

Priceline, Travelocity and Cingular Wireless each contracted with DirectRevenue LLC to deliver ads to consumers. To service its clients (including Priceline, Travelocity and Cingular Wireless), DR installed adware on millions of computers. The adware, which was undisclosed to users and difficult to remove, monitored the websites visited by the users and collected the information they typed into web forms. The NY AG filed a law suit alleging that DirectRevenue had violated New York consumer protection law, then pursued DirectRevenue's three major advertiser clients.

392 F.Supp.2d 423 (E.D.N.Y. 2005)
Hammer entered agreement with Amazon, allowing him to sell his books on the website. An Illinois resident, Anthony Trendl, placed unfavorable reviews of Hammer's books on Amazon's website.

filed (N.D. Cal. 2002)
Federal
Sun Microsystems has sued Microsoft alleging antitrust violations. Sun complained in the lawsuit that Microsoft is using its marketplace momentum to lure customers and vendors to Java technology that is incompatible with Sun Microsystem's software.

filed in District of Oregon (Nov. 2001)
Federal
Verance filed a lawsuit in federal district court charging Digimarc with violating antitrust and unfair competition laws. Among other things, Verance alleges that Digimarc illegally submitted Verance's digital watermarking technology to the Video Watermarking Group (VWM), a standards-setting body.

253 F.3d 34 (D.C. Cir. 2001)
Federal
The court of appeals upheld a previous decision that Microsoft engaged in unlawful behaviour to retain its monopoly in operating systems. However, the court also vacated Judge Thomas Penfield's breakup order, citing concerns about impartiality stemming from ex-parte contacts with the media and offensive statements about Microsoft outside the courtroom.

97 F. Supp. 2d 59 (D.D.C. 2000)
Federal
The District Court found that Microsoft violated the Sherman Act and maintained its monopoly power by anti-competitive means and by tying its web browser to its operating system. The court also found Microsoft in violation of state antitrust laws.

00-CV-0002 (N.D.N.Y., May 2, 2000)
Federal
The court entered a default judgment awarding statutory damages and attorneys fees against a defendant who failed to respond to a complaint under the Anticybersquatting Consumer Protection Act. The plaintiffs sought the transfer of the domain names somethinggreek.

1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20605 (S.D. Ind., May 7, 1999)
Unknown
Federal judge dismissed antitrust suit against NSI. Plaintiff alleged that NSI committed antitrust violation by refusing to grant him a previously registered domain name.

1999 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 2997 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)
Federal
Defendant, the private company that has handled domain name registrations since 1993, is entitled to antitrust immunity under the federal instrumentality doctrine. The court held that under the Cooperative Agreement between NSI and the National Science Foundation, NSI was acting in compliance with clearly articulated government policies or programs and was therefore immunized from antitrust liability to the same extent as the government entity.

1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 20453 (N.D. Cal. 1998)
Federal
In a dispute arising out of Plaintiff's registration of the domain name "whoswhointheworld.com", NSI's implementation of its intellectual property dispute resolution policy did not constitute a civil conspiracy under Sherman Act § 1, nor intentional interference with contract or prospective business relations.

21 F.Supp. 2d 27 (D.D.C. 1998)
Federal
Personal jurisdiction was proper in an antitrust action arising out of an alleged conspiracy between defendants during construction of an Internet Yellow Pages service. The District of Columbia's long arm statute was satisfied when, in addition to alleged agreements made outside the jurisdiction that would cause direct harm inside the forum district, defendants' "highly interactive" Web site and the commercial "quality" and "nature" of the Web site favored exercising personal jurisdiction over the defendants.

1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14231 (D.D.C. 9/14/98)
Federal
District Court denied defendant's summary judgment motion, finding sufficient material facts to be in dispute regarding (1) existence of illegal tying arrangements, (2) whether defendant's boot and start-up screen restrictions amount to unreasonable restraints of trade, (3) whether defendant has relied on its operating system monopoly to coerce distribution channels into "exclusive dealing" arrangements which have substantially foreclosed non-Microsoft browsers from competing, and (4) whether defendant has monopoly power in Intel-compatible PC operating systems. The court did grant summary judgment for defendant with regard to allegations of "monopoly leveraging", finding the theory inconsistent with the Sherman Act and in light of the Supreme Court's pronouncements on the theory's limitations of reach.

1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14696 (D.D.C. 1998)
Federal
Thirty percent fee imposed with registration of second-level domain names charged by NSI and deposited into U.S. Government's "Intellectual Infrastructure Fund" held not to constitute an illegal tax after explicit Congressional ratification of fee in House Appropriations Act.

14 F.Supp.2d 710 (M.D. Pa. 1998)
Federal
Defendant's motion to dismiss for lack of personal jurisdiction granted in antitrust action. Defendant's passive Web page which merely provides information but through which no business is transacted, was not sufficient basis upon which to base general jurisdiction.

147 F.3d 935 (D.D.C. 1998)
Federal
The Court of Appeals reversed the District Court's preliminary injunction [980 F. Supp. 537 (D.D.C. 12/11/97)] prohibiting Microsoft from tying the Windows 95 and Internet Explorer licenses.

1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 8888 (N.D. Cal. 1998)
Federal
Court dismissed suit by pro se plaintiff challenging NSI's dispute resolution policy based on antitrust claims. The court held that NSI, while not a government agency, is acting in compliance with the Cooperative Agreement between it and the NSF, a clearly articulated government program, and is therefore immune from antitrust laws.

No. 98-CV-01155 (D.D.C. 5/7/98)
Federal
GTE filed suit to block the impending merger of WorldCom and MCI, alleging that it would create a monopoly in the Internet backbone services market, as well as threaten competition in the long distance market.

3 F.Supp. 2d 1165 (D. Colo. 1998)
Federal
Court permanently enjoined defendant Intercable from marketing as "programming" Jones Internet Channel, a service providing Internet access and content via broadband cable technology. The court noted that where the primary benefit of cable Internet access was the speed of transmission and the unlimited storage of information, the service constituted more than mere packaging or programming, and as such required the approval of the directors unrelated to Jones Internet Channel, as set forth in Intercable's Shareholders' Agreement.

2 F.Supp.2d 22 (D.D.C. 1998)
Federal
In class action alleging that NSI has unlawfully monopolized the business of registering Internet domain names and unconstitutionally levied taxes and fees from registrants, Judge Thomas F. Hogan found Plaintiffs entitled to summary judgment on their claim that NSI's Preservation Assessment is an illegal tax, but granted no preliminary injunction, owing to failure to show irreparable injury, and dismissed all other claims, for failure to show a likelihood of success on the merits and failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted.

(D. Tex.. 2/17/98)
Federal
Texas Attorney General's motion for district court order enjoining enforcement of Microsoft's customer nondisclosure agreements, which requires users to notify Microsoft before providing information to investigators, is dismissed on grounds that such language is standard in the software industry and the state had failed to show that its investigation had been impeded by the language. The State of Texas has been investigating Microsoft for violations of state antitrust laws, and wanted the court to order that Microsoft customers could cooperate with investigators without prior notice to Microsoft.

1998 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 1208 (D.D.C. 1998)
Federal
In action to have domain name registry's collected registration and renewal fees declared an unlawful tax, Judge Thomas F. Hogan found the case sufficiently strong on its merits to warrant issuing a temporary restraining order barring the government from spending any of the $23 million in the Intellectual Infrastructure Fund until the status of the money is adjudicated.

No. 97-1544-A (E.D. Va. filed 9/30/97)
Federal
Internet game company has sued online service provider alleging antitrust violations, unfair competition and trademark infringement arising from AOL's arrangement with a competing game company, WorldPlay, and WorldPlay's subsequent control of AOL's Games Channel. Trial scheduled for summer 1998.

51 F. Supp. 2d 389 (S.D.N.Y. 1999)
Federal
Lawsuit brought by a would-be competitor of Network Solutions Inc., alleging that NSI is illegally monopolizing the domain name registration market by blocking competitors from providing the same service.