The Resale Price Maintenance (and Minimum Advertised Price) Conundrum Post-Leegin: State and Federal Law at a Crossroads

September 2018

Abstract

As one of the counsel for Respondent in the Supreme Court’s Monsanto Company v. Spray-Rite Service Corporation decision, it has been difficult since 2007 to acknowledge that vertical minimum resale price maintenance (“RPM”) is now to be adjudged under the rule of reason, at least, in the federal courts. While the Supreme Court in Leegin Creative Leather Prods. v. PSKS, Inc. radically altered the Sherman Act Section 1 landscape on RPM by abandoning the per se test used in Monsanto, the reasoning of the Court in Leegin was that this relaxed rule would allow manufacturers more leeway with respect to dealing with free riders and promoting goodwill and brand integrity. But since the Leegin decision was issued in 2007, there has not been empirical evidence presented as to whether these purported procompetitive benefits have actually transpired. As we now exist in a data driven world, there has been ample time to collect this empirical information to determine if the Leegin decision has actually spawned the type of economic state that the Court envisioned in its reasoning for abandoning the per se treatment of RPM. Many of the States, meanwhile, have taken matters into their own hands, with or without any empirical data to support their views, to legislatively and prosecutorialy recast such claims as being subject to per se treatment in their respective jurisdictions.

Author

R. Mark McCareins

General Counsel, Metals Service Center Institute, USA

R. Mark McCareins is the general counsel of the Metals Service Center Institute (www.msci.org). He also is a Clinical Professor in the Strategy Department of Northwestern University’s Kellogg Graduate School of Management where he teaches antitrust and business law. He practiced competition law with Winston and Strawn LLP for over thirty years where he was co-counsel for Respondent Spray-Rite Service Corp. in the referenced matter. He currently is a Clinical Professor in the Strategy Department at Kellogg.

Despite pronouncements that a “New Wave” of antitrust enforcement is underway, the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) and the Antitrust Division of the Department of Justice (“DOJ”) have exercised collective silence...Read more

R. Mark McCareins

General Counsel, Metals Service Center Institute, USA

Antitrust Enforcement of No Poach/Wage Fixing Agreements Has Accelerated: Managers and Human Resource Professionals Should be Aware of The Enhanced Criminal Penalties for These Types of Agreements

Historically, when it came to antitrust enforcement, human resource (now commonly referred to as the ‘Talent Acquisition or ’Human Capital’ ) professionals were usually last on the list to...Read more

R. Mark McCareins

General Counsel, Metals Service Center Institute, USA

Product Distribution Challenge Recently Addressed by Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals in Landmark Decision Under the Robinson-Patman Act *

The passage of the Sherman Act by Congress in 1890 marked the onslaught of an antitrust revolution, which began in the United States and has now taken root in most...Read more

R. Mark McCareins

General Counsel, Metals Service Center Institute, USA

Collective Management Organisations (CMOs) at the Intersection Between EU Competition Law and the Freedom to Provide Services

This paper aims at examining some of the key questions that are essential to the daily work of Collective Management Organisations (CMOs) , who perform an important role by administering...Read more

Anita Huss-Ekerhult

General Counsel, IFRRO (International Federation of Reproduction Rights Organisations), Sweden

The Resale Price Maintenance (and Minimum Advertised Price) Conundrum Post-Leegin: State and Federal Law at a Crossroads

Abstract

Author

Company

Metals Service Center Institute

Related Papers