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 Association Attorney believe bill brand Burlington Coat Factory Chairman Colgate Committee competitor complaints Congress conspiracy Consumer Protection customers dealer termination discount retailers discount stores distribution distributors effect enforcement evidence fact fair trade laws free rider problem full-price retailers full-service Furniture GTE Sylvania HALD high-end illegal industry inference Judiciary jury litigation major contributing cause manufacturer manufacturer's marketplace merchandise million minimum advertised price Monsanto and Sharp Monsanto cited Nikon nonprice 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 SPECTER Sharp decision Sharp Electronics Sherman Act standard statement suggested retail price summary judgment SuperZoom supplier Supreme Court Swarovski terminated dealer Therm-a-Rest THORNBURG unilateral unlawful vertical price fixing vertical price restraints vertical restraints
Popularni odlomci
Stranica 337 - In the absence of any purpose to create or maintain a monopoly, the act does not restrict the long recognized right of trader or manufacturer engaged in an entirely private business, freely to exercise his own independent discretion as to parties with whom he will deal.
Stranica 330 - 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 256 - 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 322 - Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., 220 US 373, 408 (1911).
Stranica 140 - In view of my respect for the integrity of the individual States, I have given careful thought to whether the Federal Government should supplant the judgment of the States in this area. In considering this matter, I have been aware the States have not been completely insensitive to the need to make changes in this area as shown by the fact that a number of States in recent years have moved to repeal their fair trade laws. After careful thought and analysis, I conclude that I will not dissent from...
Stranica 362 - 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.
Stranica 320 - Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp., 108 S. Ct. 1515 (1988).
Stranica 336 - In the first category are agreements whose nature and necessary effect are so plainly anticompetitive that no elaborate study of the industry is needed to establish their illegality — they are "illegal per se...
Stranica 139 - Act and McGuire Act, the respective States are not required to enact fair trade laws and nonsigner provisions, but are merely given the opportunity to do so if they wish. Congress has permitted the States to enact fair trade laws since 1937, almost forty years ago, and reinforced that right in 1952.
Stranica 367 - ... service cutting usually go hand in hand. Accordingly, a manufacturer that agrees to give one dealer an exclusive territory and terminates another dealer pursuant to that agreement, or even a manufacturer that agrees with one dealer to terminate another for failure to provide contractually obligated services, exposes itself to the highly plausible claim that its real motivation was to terminate a price cutter.