Victimless Antitrust?

Victimless Antitrust? Wasn't the original idea of antitrust that people could be harmed, economically, by acts that did not amount to coercion, most particularly when “monopolists” engaged in “anticompetitive behavior”?

Of course,  with the rise of the “law and economics” movement, the Left faced sophisticated opponents who were prepared to argue that in many cases no harm was being done to consumers. Solution? Eliminate the harm requirement. That, apparently, is the genius idea behind the Obama administration’s attempt to “reinvigorate” antitrust.