Search for: "Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc"
Results 1 - 20
of 115
Sort by Relevance
|
Sort by Date
6 May 2022, 6:10 am
In 1977, in GTE Sylvania, the Courtheld that vertical customer and territorial restraints should be judged under the rule of reason.[17] In 1979, in BMI, it held that a blanket license issued by a clearinghouse of copyright owners that set a uniform price and prevented individual negotiation with licensees was a necessary precondition for the product and was thus subject to the rule of reason.[18] In 1984, in Jefferson Parish, the Court rejected automatic application of the per se rule to… [read post]
4 Feb 2022, 8:19 am
Ten days after Billing was decided, the Court decided Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 5:03 am
Certain state antitrust schemes, for example, continue to treat resale price maintenance (RPM) as per se illegal (see, for example, here), a position inconsistent with the federal consumer welfare-centric rule of reason approach (see Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
3 May 2021, 9:40 am
S. 214 (1944)); Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
17 May 2019, 9:15 am
” The court allowed state amicus arguments in cases of that sort — such as Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. [read post]
19 Sep 2018, 11:28 am
Anthem, Inc.[25] But the evidence is plenty. [read post]
14 Aug 2018, 3:50 pm
As you might recall, in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 10:17 pm
In 2007, the Supreme Court dramatically changed the landscape when it decided Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
27 Jun 2018, 1:08 pm
Holder), and overruled earlier decisions involving antitrust (Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 3:12 pm
” He asserted that this would be a new development, because, although the majority cites Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. [read post]
27 Feb 2018, 2:12 pm
Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. [read post]
ABA Section of Antitrust Law Spring Meeting 2016: Clarifying liability in hub-and-spoke conspiracies
4 May 2016, 10:08 am
On the other hand, ever since the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. [read post]
2 Feb 2016, 8:12 am
It contends both that the 2nd Circuit Court’s application of the per se rule to Apple’s vertical conduct conflicts with the Supreme Court’s decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
18 Sep 2015, 9:50 pm
The lawyers also contended that the Second Circuit ruling contradicts the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. [read post]
8 Jan 2015, 11:09 pm
As you might recall, in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
2 Oct 2014, 11:25 pm
In 2007, the Supreme Court dramatically changed the landscape when it decided Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
3 Jul 2014, 10:39 pm
The clearest example of this difference is the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
22 Apr 2013, 3:05 pm
Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 3:23 pm
In a dramatically divided but decisively 6-3 decision in Kirtsaeng v. [read post]
20 Mar 2013, 3:23 pm
In a dramatically divided but decisively 6-3 decision in Kirtsaeng v. [read post]