C|M|Law’s James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law Chris Sagers was widely quoted in the press recently concerning the Justice Department’s antitrust case against Apple, alleging that Apple had coordinated a price-fixing conspiracy among publishers of electronic books. In addition to his own post about the case on the HuffingtonPost (see http://www.huffingtonpost.com/chris-sagers/the-fate-of-apple-and-ant_b_3480835.html) Sagers was quoted in several articles in Publisher’s Weekly (concerning Apple’s trial strategy, see http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/content-and-e-books/article/57395-at-hearing-judge-says-she-is-leaning-against-apple.html, concerning the likely scope of the remedies it may face, (see http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/content-and-e-books/article/57395-at-hearing-judge-says-she-is-leaning-against-apple.html), and in a long summation of the case after trial had closed (see http://www.publishersweekly.com/pw/by-topic/digital/retailing/article/57943-why-apple-loses.html). He was quoted on the technology website CNET on the testimony of key witness Eddy Cue (see http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57589185-37/apples-eddy-cue-yep-we-caused-e-book-pricing-to-rise/), and in another long summary of the case (see http://news.cnet.com/8301-13579_3-57586765-37/apple-and-the-doj-face-off-over-e-book-prices-faq/), as well as in the widely read InformationToday (see http://newsbreaks.infotoday.com/NewsBreaks/Apple-Gambles-on-Winning-Ebook-Antitrust-Suit-90274.asp).
On April 27, C|M|LAW Professor David Forte delivered a paper in Washington to the Wilson Seminar of the Natural Law Center of Claremont University. The Wilson Seminar on the role of Natural Law in American Constitutional Jurisprudence, is named for James Wilson, a central figure in the formation of the Constitution, and sponsored by the Claremont Institute for the Study of Statesmanship and Political Philosophy. The topic of the latest meeting was the Parameters of Religious Liberty. Professor Forte’s contribution centered on what kinds of “religion” the framers had in mind when they went out of their way in the First Amendment to guarantee the “Free Exercise of Religion.” It was entitled Satan, Religious Freedom, and the Natural Law.
On Thursday, June 13th, at the Nighttown restaurant in Cleveland Heights, C|M|LAW Professor John Plecnik participated in a panel discussion hosted by Young Cleveland Running. Along with other young political candidates, Plecnik answered questions from the mediator, and then the attendees, about the importance of getting more young people involved in local politics. The panelists included Professor Plecnik, who is running for Willoughby Hills City Council, Cuyahoga County Councilman Julian Rogers, Euclid City Councilman Scott Lynch (a current C|M|LAW student), and Cleveland City Council candidates Jonathan Simon and Basheer Jones.
C|M|LAW’s James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law Chris Sagers posted The Fate of Apple and Antitrust: Overcoming Confusion About the eBooks Case today in the Huffington Post. In this post, Sagers explains that “[d]efendant Apple, as the government has shown by overwhelming evidence, orchestrated a garden variety price-fixing conspiracy among five of the six large publishing companies that dominate electronic books. They had motive to do it and the evidence is strong that they successfully raised retail prices for a long time.” He explains why, although the case seems complicated, it is not, and he predicts that Apple will lose.
To read the post, click here:
There has been a fair amount of legitimate hand-wringing in Ohio over the business practices of some landmen operating in the state on behalf of some drilling companies. There also are a fair number of people who have never heard of a land man and can’t imagine their role in the oil and gas exploration and production industry. In her role as a blogger for Crain’s Shale Report, Robertson explains the role of landmen in the shale oil and gas development process and the concerns they raise for landowners.
Robertson notes that landmen are paid by oil and gas companies to secure mineral leases with terms favorable to the companies. To entice their target landowners, landmen often offer upfront bonuses and royalty payments. But it’s difficult for landowners, who are understandably not savvy to the ins and outs of oil and gas leases, to know what the lease might really be worth.
Landmen, eager for their commissions, are known to hurry landowners into signing on the proverbial dotted line. They may tell the landowners that their neighbors have already signed, whether or not that is true. They may tell the landowners that if they don’t sign immediately, the deal will disappear. For people without means, the upfront money may be too good to resist, even if it binds them to an unfavorable lease.
Although there have been legislative efforts to regulate landman conduct, none has succeeded in Ohio to date. There are voluntary codes of conduct that help, but not enough. In this post, Robertson highlights those efforts as well as some progress in the area of information availability.
To read the blog post, click here:
In his capacity as a member of the Ohio Advisory Committee to the United States Civil Rights Commission, C|M|LAW Professor David Forte participated in two days of hearings on June 5 and 6 at the University of Toledo on the problem of human trafficking. The Committee heard testimony from research experts, the FBI, the Assistant U.S. Attorney for the Northern District of Ohio, Attorney General DeWine’s Office, rescuers, victims, and legislators. Northwest Ohio is one of the country’s most active transit points and sources of young victims of the sex trade, which involves tens of thousands of young people, girls and boys, every year. The Committee shall continue to gather information over the next few weeks and then issue a report.
On Tuesday, June 3, 2013, C|M|Law’s James A. Thomas Distinguished Professor of Law Chris Sagers attended a press conference in the Rose Garden, along with a day-long briefing session in the White House concerning the confirmation of federal judicial nominees. As was widely reported [http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-partisan/wp/2013/06/04/obama_dc_circuit_judge_nominations/], at the Rose Garden event President Obama announced three new nominations to the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals, and gave his remarks on the long-running political stalemate over judicial confirmations. During the closed-door briefing sessions, Sagers and approximately 100 other activists from around the country heard presentations by White House Counsel Kathryn Ruemmler, Special Counsel Chris Kang, and other White House officials on the judicial confirmation process and the political issues surrounding it. Sagers was invited to this event due to his work on the steering committee of the Ohio Coalition of Constitutional Values, a chapter of the national umbrella organization the Coalition of Constitutional Values, whose major focus is streamlining and de-politicizing the confirmation of federal judges.
CardHub.com, an on-line resource for everything concerning credit cards, recently posted an article on its website entitled, Why Do Credit Card Costs Vary So Widely? Following the article, the site included comments by experts in the field, including C|M|LAW Professor Gwendolyne Roberts Majette. The post describes the findings of a recent report from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services showing that the prices hospitals charge insurance providers vary widely within and among regions, states, and even individual hospitals.
Following the article, experts in the field were asked “What do you make of [the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services’] findings?”
Majette said that “The use and purchase of health care services is unlike other services. Health care is one of the few services that individuals receive without knowing the price in advance. This is because many people use some type of insurance to purchase these services. It is also because health care is ‘special.’ Receipt of health care can prevent death, serious illness, disability, and the spread of contagious diseases. Thus there is a desire to not allow costs to prevent receipt of necessary care.”
The mere fact that CMS is collecting and publishing this data will affect future prices because consumers, regulators, and researchers can use the information to comparison shop and begin to investigate further the reasons for the price variation. Additionally, the hospitals themselves now know what their competitors’ prices are and they will have to justify the prices they charge in the future. Antitrust laws preclude hospitals from sharing their prices with each other.”
To read the full post, see: