Abstract. For decades, there has been broad consensus within antitrust, intellectual property, and consumer law scholarship that consumers make decisions i
Restoring Consumer Sovereignty
For decades, there has been broad consensus within antitrust, intellectual property, and consumer law scholarship that consumers make decisions in their own best interests by consciously weighting the market’s relative prices, quantities, and qualities against each other. That consensus is unraveling in light of novel findings from cognitive and social psychology that explain how individuals’ concepts of what they prefer drive the global economy. At the same time, producers nowadays no longer merely satisfy consumers’ needs but also communicate their values, identities, and aspirations through the sale and marketing of products. As part of the growing interest in observations such as these, a wealth of psychological studies challenge the fundamental teaching of economics that the interplay of demand and supply of goods in a free market economy provides us with material wealth. This book provides a normative defense of that assumption and a theoretical framework for understanding its contradictions. It argues that the erosion of consumer sovereignty through the ability of product manufacturers and sellers to systematically take advantage of individuals’ psychological weaknesses demands a twenty-first-century reconceptualization of the consumer and a modern account of how the law should regulate the digital economy. Such an account is justified to ensure a diverse marketplace in which consumers can influence how our societies are structured and arranged. By examining the role that market manipulation plays, it offers ingredients for a realistic descriptive and normative market regulatory theory that is aware of its political economy, its behavioral suppositions, and its distributional consequences.
A Day in the Life of an Ensh*ttificator
Consumer Rights Wiki — Anti-Consumer Practices Database
The community-built wiki documenting anti-ownership, anti-consumer practices ranging from right-to-repair restrictions, planned obsolescence, subscription traps, & digital rights issues.
Price and Sovereignty Harvard Law Review
[W]e must not overlook the actual fact that dominion over things is also imperium over our fellow human beings. — Professor Morris R. Cohen,...
Establishing Trusted Representation | CAA
Labelling of quality and price is an important key for selecting goods or services. False or misleading representations may sway consumers into buying goods or services that are actually poor quality or overvalued. The Act against Unjustifiable Premiums and Misleading Representations prohibits such misleading representations. The Consumer Affairs Agency is addressing to ensure proper environment for shopping according to the Act.
Evolution of Consumption: A Psychological Ownership Framework
Technological innovations are creating new products, services, and markets that satisfy enduring consumer needs. These technological innovations create value for consumers and firms in many ways, but they also disrupt psychological ownership––the feeling that a thing is “MINE.” The authors describe two key dimensions of this technology-driven evolution of consumption pertaining to psychological ownership: (1) replacing legal ownership of private goods with legal access rights to goods and services owned and used by others and (2) replacing “solid” material goods with “liquid” experiential goods. They propose that these consumption changes can have three effects on psychological ownership: they can threaten it, cause it to transfer to other targets, and create new opportunities to preserve it. These changes and their effects are organized in a framework and examined across three macro trends in marketing: (1) growth of the sharing economy, (2) digitization of goods and services, and (3) expansion of personal data. This psychological ownership framework generates future research opportunities and actionable marketing strategies for firms aiming to preserve the positive consequences of psychological ownership and navigate cases for which it is a liability.
Protocols, Not Platforms: A Technological Approach to Free Speech
So I finally finished reading this and while I agree with the recommendation, I’m a little wary of some of the context it’s rooted in ideologically and I’m wondering if others have thoughts on these things. Equality in the marketplace I think the main problem with the text is that it relies heavily on the idea of “marketplace of ideas,” leaning heavily on the idea that protocols are actually good for markets specifically because they make competition more perfect (because there’s better knowled...
Do Payment Mechanisms Change the Way Consumers Perceive Products?
Abstract. Do payment mechanisms change the way consumers perceive products? We argue that consumers for whom credit cards (cash) have been primed focus mor
From Brussels Template to UK Tailoring: How the DMCCA Is (Re)writing the Rules for Big Tech - The Platform Law Blog
By Dr. Konstantina Bania The UK has built a “rival” to the EU’s Digital Markets Act – and it is now starting to use it. Under the Digital Markets, Competition and Consumers Act (DMCCA), the Competition and Markets Authority (CMA) is moving from abstract principles to concrete, platform‑specific rules for some of the most powerful […]
The Economics of Sovereign Media: A Roadmap for AT Protocol | ATmosphereConf VODs
The talk will focus on (1) the structural shifts reshaping the media landscape & creator economy and provide a roadmap / suggestions for how the AT Protocol ecosystem & community can be best positioning to serve the needs of creators of all kinds (emphasis / focus here on independent creators) through this evolutio, while preserving their rights to sovereignty & ownership. The talk ideally touches on both cultural, economic and technical / infrastructural topics. Will be speaking in my capacity both as an artist and as an investor / student of media markets.
Consumer Reports unveils 'Consumer Finance AI Standard' a first-of-its-kind framework defining what consumers are owed from AI-powered financial products
Washington, DC – Consumer Reports today published the Consumer Finance AI Standard, a first-of-its-kind framework defining the rights, protections, and design practices consumers are owed…
Google’s Chrome Antitrust Paradox
This Article examines Google’s dominance of the browser market, highlighting how Google’s Chrome browser plays a critical role in reinforcing Google’s dominance in other markets. While Google portrays Chrome as a neutral platform built on open-source technologies, this Article shows that Chrome is, in fact, instrumental in Google’s strategy to reinforce its dominance in the online advertising, publishing, and browser markets. The examination of Google’s strategic acquisitions, anticompetitive practices, and the implementation of so-called “privacy controls” underlines that Chrome is far from a neutral gateway to the web. Rather, it serves as a key tool for Google to maintain and extend its market power, often to the detriment of competition and innovation in the digital economy.This Article illustrates how Chrome not only bolsters Google’s position in online advertising and publishing through practices such as coercion and self-preferencing, but also leverages its advertising clout to engage in a “pay-to-play” paradigm—the cornerstone of Google’s larger strategy of market control. It also outlines potential regulatory interventions and remedies by drawing on historical antitrust precedents. Lastly, this Article proposes a triad of solutions motivated by an analysis of Google’s abuse of Chrome, including behavioral remedies targeting specific anticompetitive practices, structural remedies involving an internal separation of Google’s divisions, and divestiture of Chrome from Google into an independent organization.Despite Chrome’s dominance and its critical role in Google’s ecosystem, as well as its recent legal troubles with the Department of Justice, it so far has avoided significant antitrust action. A key reason for this inaction lies in the long-standing precedent supporting the hegemony of technology firms and the uncertainty surrounding Chrome’s viability as a standalone entity. This Article attempts to address these issues to enable antitrust actions that are essential in remedying current market imbalances. Such actions are also critical to mitigate future threats to competition from an increasingly monopolistic technology landscape, thereby fostering a competitive digital environment that promotes innovation and protects consumer interests.
How To Protect Your Intellectual Property Across Borders
Protect Your Intellectual Property with strong IP rights. Safeguard patents, trademarks, designs, and trade secrets to stay competitive in global markets.
Unlocking the commons
"The most powerful and interesting media model will remain raising money from members who don't just permit but <em>insist</em> that the product be given away for free."
Technology and Below-the-Line Labor in the Copyfight over Intellectual Property
Andrew Ross, Technology and Below-the-Line Labor in the Copyfight over Intellectual Property, American Quarterly, Vol. 58, No. 3, Rewiring the "Nation": The Place of Technology in American Studies (Sep., 2006), pp. 743-766
