Quote:
Originally Posted by DiapDealer
A perfectly sound and reasonable defense. The only one that's applicable in fact.
That's not a second line of defense. That's not even relevant—even if it were provably true. Illegal collusion to fix prices is the charge. Any other factors being introduced to the discussion are strictly diversionary in nature.
|
Quote:
|
On June 28, 2007, the Supreme Court overruled Dr. Miles, discussed below, holding that such vertical price restraints as Minimum Advertised Pricing are not per se unlawful but, rather, must be judged under the "rule of reason." Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc., Slip Op. No. 06–480 (Decided June 28, 2007).[4] This marked a dramatic shift on how attorneys and enforcement agencies address the legality of contractual minimum prices, and essentially allowed the reestablishment of resale price maintenance in the United States in most (but not all) commercial situations.
|
LINK
Based on that case, the Supreme Court is at least open to a "second line of defense" argument, contrary to popular belief.