Daniel Sokol

Daniel Sokol

Carolyn Craig Franklin Chair in Law and Business and Professor of Business

USC Gould School of Law

University of Southern California

Contact

699 Exposition Boulevard
Los Angeles, California 90089-0071

dsokol@usc.edu

University of Southern California faculty profile

Antitrust & Competition Policy

D. Daniel Sokol is the Carolyn Craig Franklin Chair in Law and Business at the USC Gould School of Law and an Affiliate Professor of Business at the Marshall School of Business, where he teaches in the marketing department. He serves as faculty director of the Center for Transnational Law and Business and the co-director of the USC Marshall Initiative on Digital Competition. Professor Sokol’s teaching and scholarship focus on complex business issues from early stage start-ups to multinational businesses and the issues that businesses face regarding competition: antitrust, data breaches, corporate governance, compliance, innovation, M&A, digital transformation, and global business regulation.

Professor Sokol is a member of the American Law Institute. He also serves as academic advisor to the United States Chamber of Commerce and as a non-governmental Advisor to the International Competition Network. Additionally, in a part time capacity, he serves as Senior Advisor at White & Case LLP. Professor Sokol has testified or presented his work to authorities in the United States and around the world.

Professor Sokol is among the top 10 most cited antitrust law professors from 2013 to 2020. His work has appeared in a variety of journals: Strategic Management Journal, Journal of Law and Economics, Harvard Business Review, Sloan Business Review, Michigan Law Review and Northwestern Law Review, among others.

Degrees

LL.M. University of Wisconsin

J.D. University of Chicago

M.St. University of Oxford

B.A. Amherst College

Topics

Recent Academic Article Summaries

ACADEMIC ARTICLE SUMMARY

Big Data, Little Chance of Success: Why Precedent Does Not Support Anti-Data Theories of Harm

2022
Written By:

Jaclyn Phillips

Jaclyn Phillips

Kristen O’Shaughnessy

Kristen O’Shaughnessy

Nathan Swire

Nathan Swire
Summary

Some worry that tech firms could use big data to harm consumers and competition. Forcing firms to share data would reduce incentives to innovate and compete. Concerns about privacy are better addressed by privacy law.

Policy Relevance

The expansion of antitrust law to regulate tech firms’ uses of big data would harm consumers.

Go to Article Summary: Big Data, Little Chance of Success: Why Precedent Does Not Support Anti-Data Theories of Harm
ACADEMIC ARTICLE SUMMARY

Harming Competition and Consumers under the Guise of Protecting Privacy: An Analysis of Apple’s iOS 14 Policy Updates

2021
Written By:

Feng Zhu

Feng Zhu
Summary

Apple’s iOS 14 update claims to protect privacy by requiring consumers to opt in to allow data sharing by third-party apps. But this unfairly advantages Apple’s own products.

Policy Relevance

Apple intends iOS 14 to restrict competition. Pro-consumer privacy policies support consumer choice.

Go to Article Summary: Harming Competition and Consumers under the Guise of Protecting Privacy: An Analysis of Apple’s iOS 14 Policy Updates
ACADEMIC ARTICLE SUMMARY

Understanding AI Collusion and Compliance

2021
Written By:

Justin Johnson

Justin Johnson
Summary

Artificial intelligence (AI) allows firms to adopt new types of anti-competitive behavior, but may also aid in the detection of such behavior. AI collusion could include non-price elements, such as product reviews and ratings.

Policy Relevance

Firms and competition authorities can use AI to prevent collusive behavior.

Go to Article Summary: Understanding AI Collusion and Compliance
ACADEMIC ARTICLE SUMMARY

FRAND (And Industrial Policy) in China

2017
Written By:

Wentong Zheng

Wentong Zheng
Summary

Some patents must be licensed under fair, reasonable, and non-discriminatory (FRAND) terms. China’s Anti-Monopoly Law (AML) empowers Chinese authorities to decide cases involving such licenses. Because the Chinese economy is so large, Chinese decisions will affect licensing worldwide.

Policy Relevance

Chinese policies favoring Chinese firms might affect the outcome of Chinese FRAND cases. Such a short-sighted policy will harm China.

Go to Article Summary: FRAND (And Industrial Policy) in China
ACADEMIC ARTICLE SUMMARY

Does Antitrust Have a Role to Play in Regulating Big Data?

2017
Written By:

Roisin E. Comerford

Roisin E. Comerford
Summary

This paper reviews studies that consider whether antitrust law should be used to regulate big data. Most conclude that such a use of antitrust law could harm innovation and consumers. Generally, the use of big data supports competition and benefits consumers.

Policy Relevance

Antitrust law addresses harm to competition, not harm to privacy. Consumer protection law is the best way to address privacy problems.

Go to Article Summary: Does Antitrust Have a Role to Play in Regulating Big Data?
See All Article Summaries

Blog Posts

See All

Quotes in the News

“Sometimes the remedies have nothing to do with antitrust concerns, but you are so desperate to close a deal that you give up the store to the Chinese. Firms will make all kinds of concessions. If this were the United States, people would say: I'll see you in court. No one's going to do that in China.”

 Sokol, D. (2013, May 2). Reuters.

Daniel Sokol

TAP Scholar
Carolyn Craig Franklin Chair in Law and Business and Professor of Business

USC Gould School of Law

University of Southern California

Related Scholars