To Amend the Sherman Act Regarding Retail Competition: Hearing Before the Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, One Hundred First Congress, First Session on S. 865 ... June 1, 1989, Opseg 4U.S. Government Printing Office, 1990 - Broj stranica: 389 |
Ostala izdanja - Prikaži sve
Uobičajeni izrazi i fraze
ABCD agree anticompetitive antitrust laws Appliance Attorney believe bill brand Burlington Coat Factory Business Electronics Chairman Committee Company competitor complaints Congress conspiracy Consumer Protection cooperative advertising customers discount retail distributors economics of vertical effect eliminate price competition enforcement evidence fact fair trade laws fixing free rider problem full-price retailers full-service Furniture gallery high-end high-priced illegal increase industry inference Judiciary jury Justice legislation litigation major contributing cause manufacturer manufacturer's marketplace merchandise minimum advertised price Monsanto and Sharp Nikon North Carolina outlets overrule Panasonic percent Pitofsky plaintiff Price-Fixing Act pricing policies programs Protection Against Price-Fixing resale price maintenance restrictions result rule of reason sell Senator GRASSLEY Senator KOHL Senator METZENBAUM Senator Thurmond Service Station Sharp Electronics Sherman Act standard statement suggested retail price summary judgment SuperZoom suppliers Supreme Court Swarovski territory Therm-a-Rest THORNBURG vertical price restraints vertical price-fixing vertical restraints
Popularni odlomci
Stranica 364 - But where the inference is so strained as not to have a reasonable relation to the circumstances of life as we know them, it is not competent for the legislature to create it as a rule governing the procedure of courts.
Stranica 323 - I admit that it is difficult to define in legal language the precise line between lawful and unlawful combinations. This must be left for the courts to determine in each particular case. All that we, as lawmakers, can do is to declare general principles, and we can be assured that the courts will apply them so as to carry out the meaning of the law, as the courts of England and the United States have done for centuries.
Stranica 320 - Every contract, combination ... or conspiracy, in restraint of trade or commerce among the several States," 1 the Supreme Court in Standard Oil Co.
Stranica 251 - Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I very much appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today In support of four public works projects in my district, the 13th Congressional District of Ohio.
Stranica 315 - Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 US 373, 408 (1911).
Stranica 351 - Manufacturers is a voluntary business association of more than 13,500 member companies and subsidiaries, large and small, located in every state. Members range in size from the very large to the more than 9,000 smaller manufacturing firms, each with fewer...
Stranica 220 - Storage & Van Co. v. Atlas Van Lines, Inc., 792 F2d 210 (DC Cir. 1986). house. The other leading floral service network, Teleflora, had a similar rule. The plaintiff was what bankers call a "subswitcher...
Stranica 341 - ... some kind of an understanding on price. The Supreme Court's opinion in Sharp did not specifically spell out what evidence is required, but it is noteworthy that the opinion affirmed a Court of Appeals opinion that had stated it was sufficient for liability if the manufacturer and the surviving dealer "expressly or impliedly agree to set its prices at some level, though not a specific one.
Stranica 322 - We noted that especially in the vertical restraint context 'departure from the rule-of-reason standard must be based on demonstrable economic effect rather than . . . upon formalistic line drawing.' We concluded that vertical nonprice restraints had not been shown to have such a 'pernicious effect on competition' and to be so 'lacking [in] . . . redeeming value' as to justify per se illegality.
Stranica 355 - Under Colgate, the manufacturer can announce its resale prices in advance and refuse to deal with those who fail to comply. And a distributor is free to acquiesce in the manufacturer's demand in order to avoid termination.