Search for: "Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. PSKS, Inc." Results 1 - 20 of 115
Sort by Relevance | Sort by Date
RSS Subscribe: 20 results | 100 results
6 May 2022, 6:10 am by Noah J. Phillips
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 by Zak Gowen
Ten days after Billing was decided, the Court decided Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
8 Nov 2021, 5:03 am by Alden Abbott
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]
17 May 2019, 9:15 am by Dan Schweitzer
” The court allowed state amicus arguments in cases of that sort — such as Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. [read post]
2 Aug 2018, 10:17 pm by Bona Law PC
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 by Toby Heytens
Holder), and overruled earlier decisions involving antitrust (Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]
25 Jun 2018, 3:12 pm by Beth Farmer
” He asserted that this would be a new development, because, although the majority cites Leegin Creative Leather Products Inc. v. [read post]
4 May 2016, 10:08 am by Jetta Sandin
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 by Darcy Jalandoni
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 by Lyle Denniston
 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]
2 Oct 2014, 11:25 pm by Jarod Bona
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 by Jarod Bona
The clearest example of this difference is the Supreme Court’s 2007 decision in Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc. v. [read post]