Algorithms and 'Twombly': An Inevitable Collision Course
Antitrust Trade and Practice columnists Shepard Goldfein and James Keyte write that pricing algorithms present a number of unique opportunities to businesses to improve their processes and efficiency. Sellers can automatically adjust their conduct with the demands of the market, increasing efficiency and saving resources and money. However, critics worry that because algorithms have become so advanced, they may enable new forms of anticompetitive coordination that were not possible before.
June 12, 2017 at 02:04 PM
8 minute read
Over the past decade, computers have increasingly become more powerful and able to handle larger amounts of data at higher speeds. As Moore's Law postulates, the ability of computers to handle data will roughly double every two years. This continuing advancement has allowed sophisticated algorithms to analyze the world and predict how people will behave. An algorithm is a set of rules written to be executed in a specific order, designed to solve a problem or carry out a task. As computer systems have become more sophisticated, algorithms are increasingly being used by companies to automate complex and repetitive tasks that were previously much more costly when done by humans.
As noted by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in the background paper to its June 2017 panel on algorithms, computational algorithms can be used by businesses for predictive analysis—where the algorithms measure the likelihood of future outcomes based on analysis of historical data—and also can optimize business processes, reduce transaction and production costs, segment consumers or set optimal prices in response to market circumstances. Indeed, the growing usefulness of algorithms has led many companies around the world to employ them in order to improve business decisions and automate processes.
Benefits, Risks of Algorithms
In the competitive arena, pricing algorithms present a number of unique opportunities to businesses to improve their processes and efficiency. Algorithms make the facilitation of business processes much easier and faster. This means that sellers can automatically adjust their conduct with the demands of the market, increasing efficiency and saving resources and money. Moreover, they allow businesses partially or fully to automate some of their key systems. This further reduces costs, improves efficiency and decreases the time and monetary or personnel resources that need to be spent on these processes. This automation of tasks can lead to more and better competition in markets, as businesses quickly respond to each other and to customers, which can increase efficiency and profitability at the same time.
However, this ease of coordination is not necessarily a universal boon. Critics of algorithms worry that because algorithms have become so advanced, they may enable new forms of anticompetitive coordination that were not possible before. For example, in situations where collusion previously could only be implemented using explicit communication, algorithms, in theory, could create new mechanisms that allow businesses to implement a common policy and to observe the behavior of other firms without any human interaction at all. As the OECD postulates, “algorithms may enable firms to replace explicit collusion with tacit co-ordination.”1 The notion is that algorithms, properly programmed, can automatically detect when a cartel member is “cheating,” and thus can more effectively punish the deviant cartel member.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View All!['Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case 'Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://k2-prod-alm.s3.us-east-1.amazonaws.com/brightspot/6d/c4/9fef7ed94ec2ab661f4098d24490/hector-gonzalez-2022-002-767x633.jpg)
'Serious Legal Errors'?: Rival League May Appeal Following Dismissal of Soccer Antitrust Case
6 minute read![Private Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row Private Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/nationallawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2023/03/SDNY-4-767x633.jpg)
Private Equity Giant KKR Refiles SDNY Countersuit in DOJ Premerger Filing Row
3 minute read![Skadden and Steptoe, Defending Amex GBT, Blasts Biden DOJ's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Merger Proposal Skadden and Steptoe, Defending Amex GBT, Blasts Biden DOJ's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Merger Proposal](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/nationallawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2024/08/05_Skadden-4-767x633.jpg)
Skadden and Steptoe, Defending Amex GBT, Blasts Biden DOJ's Antitrust Lawsuit Over Merger Proposal
4 minute read![Antitrust Yearly Recap: Aggressive Changes by the Biden Administration Precede President Trump’s Return Antitrust Yearly Recap: Aggressive Changes by the Biden Administration Precede President Trump’s Return](https://images.law.com/cdn-cgi/image/format=auto,fit=contain/https://images.law.com/newyorklawjournal/contrib/content/uploads/sites/389/2023/08/Hoffman-and-Schwartz.jpg)
Antitrust Yearly Recap: Aggressive Changes by the Biden Administration Precede President Trump’s Return
14 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Recent Controversial Decision and Insurance Law May Mitigate Exposure for Companies Subject to False Claims Act Lawsuits
- 2Visa Revocation and Removal: Can the New Administration Remove Foreign Nationals for Past Advocacy?
- 3Your Communications Are Not Secure! What Legal Professionals Need to Know
- 4Legal Leaders Need To Create A High-Trust Culture
- 5There's a New Chief Judge in Town: Meet the Top Miami Jurist
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250