Director, Bureau of Competition, Federal Trade Commission. This article summarizes the author's remarks made before the Commercial Arbitration Practice Committee of the American Arbitration Association, November 21, 1974 in New York City. The author wishes to thank Bradley D. Stam, Assistant to the Director, Bureau of Competition, for his assistance in the preparation of these remarks. The comments expressed in this paper are those of the author and not necessarily those of the Federal Trade Commission or any individual Commissioner.
The Federal Trade Commission recently has accepted a consent order^ which provides for arbitration of certain disputes arising under its provisions. This innovative use of arbitration procedures is part of a concerted effort to develop antitrust remedies which will allow enforcement agencies to be more effective in tailoring antitrust relief, so as to protect and promote competition in each particular market where violations are found.
Since Congress first passed the Sherman Act in 1890, antitrust litigation has been primarily concerned with the question of what sorts of business activities violate the law. The subsequent enactment of the Clayton Act and the Federal Trade Commission Act brought more business activities within the prohibition of the antitrust laws, and, at the same time, gave rise to more litigation aimed at drawing the line between permissible commercial activity and illegal conduct. Much of the work in antitrust law has been devoted to developing legal theories which will prevent the existing statutes from becoming obsolete in an era of dramatic economic change. By and large that effort has been successful.