Department of Justice

The Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division has opened a review of the Paramount Consent Decrees, which for over seventy years have regulated how certain movie studios distribute films to movie theatres.  The purpose of the review is to determine whether or not the decrees should be terminated or modified. In particular, the Paramount Decrees have regulated how certain movie studios distribute films to movie theatres since the Supreme Court’s decision in United States v. Paramount, 334 U.S. 131 (1948).

In America we want institutions that make our democracy strong—that seems like a no brainer. So as one line of thinking goes, antitrust enforcers should step beyond consumer welfare and think about what would be good or bad for our democracy, or for values like the free speech the First Amendment protects. The suggestion is that perhaps enforcers should broaden the consumer welfare lens to think about effects on democracy or expression. I’d like to focus my remarks today on two responses to that suggestion.

The United States Department of Justice filed a civil antitrust lawsuit to block AT&T/DirecTV’s proposed acquisition of Time Warner. The $108 billion acquisition would substantially lessen competition, resulting in higher prices and less innovation for millions of Americans. The combination of AT&T/DirecTV’s vast video distribution infrastructure and Time Warner’s popular television programming would be one of the largest mergers in American history.

How does antitrust fare in the required reduction in federal regulations? First, antitrust is law enforcement, it’s not regulation.  At its best, it supports reducing regulation, by encouraging competitive markets that, as a result, require less government intervention.  That is to say, proper and timely antitrust enforcement helps competition police markets instead of bureaucrats in Washington, D.C. doing it.

The Department of Justice’s Antitrust Division announced that it will require Entercom Communications Corp. to divest 13 radio stations in order for Entercom to proceed with its acquisition of CBS Radio, Inc.

With your permission, I will discuss three topics today. First, why antitrust enforcement is such an important part of a free market system. Second, the progress we’ve made in sharing the value of effective antitrust enforcement around the world. And third, a few thoughts on what I hope we can achieve in the future. On all these points, I hope to emphasize the fundamental role of the rule of law and procedural fairness in the application of the antitrust laws. ....

The Department of Justice reached a settlement that will prohibit DIRECTV and its parent corporation, AT&T, from illegally sharing confidential, forward-looking information with competitors.

The department’s Antitrust Division filed suit on Nov. 2, 2016, alleging that DIRECTV was the ringleader of a series of unlawful information exchanges between DIRECTV and three of its competitors – Cox Communications, Charter Communications and AT&T (before it acquired DIRECTV) – during the companies’ negotiations to carry the SportsNet LA “Dodgers Channel.” SportsNet LA holds the exclusive rights to telecast almost all live Dodgers games in the Los Angeles area. The settlement, which will obtain all of the relief sought by the department in its lawsuit, will ensure that when DIRECTV and AT&T negotiate with providers of video programming, including negotiations to telecast the Dodgers Channel, they will not illegally share competitively-sensitive information with their rivals. The settlement also requires the companies to monitor certain communications their programming executives have with their rivals, and to implement antitrust training and compliance programs.

The Department of Justice announced that it will require AMC Entertainment Holdings to divest theatres in 15 local markets, sell off most of its holdings and relinquish all of its governance rights in National Cinemedia LLC (NCM), and transfer 24 theatres with a total of 384 screens to the network of Screenvision LLC in order to complete its $1.2 billion acquisition of Carmike Cinemas Inc. The Justice Department’s Antitrust Division filed a civil antitrust lawsuit in the US District Court for the District of Columbia to block the proposed acquisition. At the same time, the department filed a proposed settlement that, if approved by the court, would resolve the competitive harm alleged in the lawsuit. The department said that without the required divestitures and other relief, the merger would result in higher prices and lower quality theatre amenities for moviegoers and weakened competition in the markets for preshow services and theatre advertising, where Screenvision is NCM’s only meaningful rival.