Like last time - Blawg Review #67 - this blawg review begins with a quick review of the antitrust issues that Antitrust Review focuses on. We’ll then canvas the blogosphere and finally finish with some lighter items, including what is undoubtedly the greatest four paragraphs to ever appear in a newspaper.

Quick Look Review

It was a busy week in antitrust. The chairman of the FTC announced her resignation. Microsoft was fined $1.3 billion. And England’s antitrust authority announced it will offer 100,000 pounds to individuals who provide it with tips regarding cartel activity.

Peter Klein at Organization and Markets reports on a recent presentation by Josh Wright (who blogs at Truth on the Market) to present his paper “The Roberts Court and the Chicago School of Antitrust: The 2006 Term and Beyond”. According to Peter, the “paper provides a nice overview of the evolution of antitrust theory and practice over the last several decades. Josh describes three historical phases of antitrust thinking: the Harvard approach (Bain’s structure-conduct-performance paradigm), the Chicago approach, and the modern ‘post-Chicago’ approach (based on game-theoretic industrial organization).” Finally, at Oligopoly Watch, Steve Hannaford looks at the two leading companies in the medical testing market.

Rule of Reason Review

• The Election

Shockingly enough, presidential politics generated a lot of posts this week. Following a New York Times story, there was debate as to whether John McCain - who was born outside the US - can or cannot be president under the Constitution. At the Legal Throry Blog, Lawrence Solom has a lengthy post about the original meaning of “natural born.” Michael Dorf also addressed the issue. Twice. Jonathan Turley notes that Alexander Hamilton, born in the West Indies, was viewed as ineligible for the presidency by some framers. Jim Lindgrin weighs in at the Volokh Conspiracy with some 18th century texts. And Jack Balkin argues (only partially tongue in cheek) at Balkinization that George Washington was unconstitutional.

In other election news, Above The Law went substantive this week with a guest post from Ted Frank regarding what could happen if Obama is elected and Congress eliminates the social security tax cap. And then it had a follow up post. Whether any of this happens (or even if Obama is in favor of eliminating the cap) is a bit of an open question.

Elections involving voting on a Tuesday (at least in the United States) and John Phillips at the Word on Employment Law has a state-by-state survey of the laws governing employee voting rights. Naturally, my “state” of the District of Columbia has no laws regarding employees’ right to vote. John Phillips also comments on employers who fire blogging employees. I am lucky; my employer links to this blog (even though I only blog on my own time).

• Patent and IT Law

The big patent law news this week was the unmasking of the Patent Troll Tracker: Cisco’s Rick Frenkel. There were reactions of note at Patently-O, Overlawyered, and the WSJ Law Blog (note to Ed.: the world will not end if/when you are unmasked!).

The Patent Baristas take issue with recent Congressional testimony regarding the patent office.

Although not a Patent/IT post, he is a patent lawyer, so we’ll mention that at BlawgIT Brett Trout writes about why clients should want to be trusted by their lawyers; you check out his post and others in this week’s Carnival of Trust.

• Health Care

David Harlow at the HealthBlog looks at the differing reactions to a single GAO report on Medicare Advantage plans (does it save or cost seniors money?) and concludes that the “bottom line is that it’s less black-and-white than advocates on either side of the issue would have you believe, and that if there’s blame to be laid at anyone’s feet, it’s to be laid at the feet of a variety of parties, including both the regulators (or, in this case, Congress) and the regulated community.” Also on the health care beat this week, Tyler Cowen at Marginal Revolution believes penalties for unlawful cancellation of health insurance policies should be larger.

The Drug and Device Law Blog has a pair of interesting post. On its substantive issue, the blogging duo of Beck/Herrmann review the FDA’s “new draft guidelines that slightly relaxed some aspects of the Agency’s prohibitions concerning promotion of off-label uses by manufacturers of FDA-regulated products.” Be forewarned: the post is, counting quotations, over 4,100 words. On the general blawg interest level, they also wonder why blogs are undervalued by large law firms (assuming that they are).

• Everything Else

The excellent Sports Law Blog had several posts of note this week. Howard Wasserman thinks that Roger Clemons’ attorney Rusty Hardin needs to stop talking: “Everything Hardin has done for the past three months has been designed to win in the court of the public opinion. He does not mind the circus. The problem is the court of public opinion that Hardin has tried so hard to win over simply does not believe his client.” He also has a pair of interesting posts (one, two) about the lawsuit filed the members of the Duke lacrosse team that were not indicted. Not only is the complaint 237 pages and 747 paragraphs long but the Sports Law Blog wonder how Duke University and its administrators and employees are state actors for the constitutional law claims; also there are some first amendment issues that raise some interesting questions.

The Green Bag’s announcement that it will release its own law school rankings provoked well thought out comments from Josh Wright at Truth on the Market and Paul Secunda at Concurring Opinions.

Winning Trial Advocacy Techniques thinks that you should give jurors time to answer questions during voir dire.

Adams Drafting declares that “by-laws is dead. Long live bylaws!“

At Simple Justice, Scott Greenfield, a criminal defense attorney, worries about video tapping all confessions because “I can see the use of videotaped confessions as a nightmare, easily manipulated and nearly impossible to overcome.”

Tort reform is not all it is cracked up to be. Or so argues Blawgletter’s Barry Barnett in regards to Texas tort law reform efforts. And speaking of Texas, apparently it is still obsessed with dildos according to Marc Radazza.

William Patry explains when in copyright litigation a party is a prevailing party.

If you thought your commute was bad, check out the Paralegal Gateway’s report about the paralegal who takes a bus, a ferry and a train to get to work.

The Lighter Side

On the fun side of things, Concurring Opinions posted parts 1, 2 and 3 of its podcast interview with Ron Moore and David Eick, the creators, producers, and writers of Battlestar Galactica. And if you think we didn’t listen to all three parts, you don’t know us very well.

David Giacalone wants the ladies to make him an offer at f/k/a in leap day tradition (leap day was traditionally “the one day when a woman could with society’s blessing propose to any man of her choosing”).

The Italian Supreme Court recently limited the rights of Italian men to grope themselves in public according to Kevin Underhill at Lowering The Bar.

Finally, last week, the San Francisco Chronicle reported that giant pythons could soon alter life in the bay area:

At 20 miles a month, a determined Burmese python from Florida could arrive in San Francisco as early as August 2020.

“It would be exceptional for one animal to be that unidirectional in its movement, but it’s mathematically possible,” Rodda said.

The snake’s cross-country crawl would be made easier by the large population of beavers along the way, Rodda said.

“Beavers would be a very tasty treat for them,” Rodda said. “No beaver would be safe from a python.”

Blawg Review has information about next week’s host, and instructions how to get your blawg posts reviewed in upcoming issues.

Comment feed: RSS 2.0. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.