Abstract
Recent arguments by some legal scholars and attempts by the Antitrust Department of the US. Justice Department to overturn the 74-year old per se prohibition of vertical price restrictions have invoked the argument that resale price maintenance agreements (RPMs) control "free riders". This article reviews the legal history of the per se rule and examines the alleged procompetitive benefits of eliminating free riders through the use of RPM agreements by identifying the situations in which free riding is likely to occur, the circumstances in which it can be controlled by an RPM, and the social costs of using RPMs. It is concluded that true free riding is a relatively rare phenomenon and the benefit from moving to a rule of reason is insufficient to offset the social and economic costs of abandoning the per se rule.
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
