26 Mar 2007
SCOTUS Case May End Sale Prices

If I own something, I can sell it for any price I so choose. If you try to "sell" me something with the resale price fixed, that is not a sale at all - you're merely leasing me the item. And further, for this scheme to be logical, I would be obligated to place the burden of a fixed resale price on my customer, forbidding him for selling the item for less than he paid for it.

The recension of this rule would eliminate the only part of anti-trust law that actually supports property rights. Go figure.

If you own a mom & pop store and can't get rid of some of your inventory, you can always clear out some shelf space by holding a sale. If the Supreme Court sides with business interests in a case they heard today, however, such sales may no longer be possible. Since 1911, it has been illegal for manufacturers to force retailers into setting a price floor for products — individual retailers get to decide how much they sell their products for. But today the Supreme Court heard oral arguments in a case seeking to overturn this longstanding rule. Should the Court do so, it would drive up consumer prices across the board. This case is particularly salient in the era of Internet shopping: consumers are now easily able to shop around to multiple retailers to find the best price. The Court could wipe out this advantage. From the article: "Should the Court abandon the... rule against minimum resale price maintenance... it would send a signal that the Roberts Court will continue to narrow the application of the antitrust laws and that the Court may disregard settled precedent and Congressional will in other areas of the law as well."

(link) [Slashdot]

21:09 /Politics | 1 comment | permanent link