CHANROBLES VIRTUAL LAW LIBRARY
US LAWS, STATUTES and CODES : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library USA Supreme Court Decisions | Resolutions : Chan Robles Virtual Law Library

ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library™ | chanrobles.com™   
Main Index Repository of Laws, Statutes and Codes Latest Philippine Supreme Court Decisions Chan Robles Virtual Law Library Latest Legal Updates Philippine Legal Resources Significant Philippine Legal Resources Worldwide Legal Resources Philippine Supreme Court Decisions United States Legal Resources United States Supreme Court Jurisprudence ChanRobles LawTube - Social Network

ChanRobles Internet Bar Review : www.chanroblesbar.com DebtKollect Company, Inc. - Debt Collection Firm Intellectual Property Division - Chan Robles Law Firm

Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsChanRobles On-Line Bar Review

google search for chanrobles.comSearch for www.chanrobles.com


UNITED STATES V. LOWE'S INC., 371 U. S. 38 (1962)

Subscribe to Cases that cite 371 U. S. 38 RSS feed for this section

U.S. Supreme Court

United States v. Lowe's Inc., 371 U.S. 38 (1962)

United States v. Lowe's Incorporated

No. 42

Argued October 16, 1962

Decided November 5, 1962*

371 U.S. 38

Syllabus

1. Section 1 of the Sherman Act was violated when individual distributors of copyrighted feature motion picture films for television exhibition engaged in block booking such films to television broadcasting stations -- i.e., conditioning the license or sale of the right to exhibit one or more feature films upon acceptance by each station of a package or block of films containing one or more unwanted or inferior films -- even in the absence of any combination or conspiracy between the distributors and any monopolization or attempt to monopolize. Pp. 371 U. S. 39-50, 371 U. S. 52.

2. The fact that, on the records in these cases, each defendant was found to have entered into a comparatively small number of illegal contracts did not make it improper for the District Court to grant injunctive relief. Pp. 371 U. S. 50-51.

3. The block booking engaged in by one of the defendants cannot be justified or excused by its plea of business necessity, since the thrust of the antitrust laws cannot be avoided merely by claiming that the otherwise illegal conduct was compelled by contractual obligations to a third party. Pp. 371 U. S. 51-52.

4. The decrees entered by the District Court should be amended so as to:

(a) Require the defendants to price films individually and offer them on a picture by picture basis. Pp. 371 U. S. 52-54.

(b) Prohibit differentials in price between a film when sold individually and when sold as part of a package, except when such price differentials are justified by relevant and legitimate cost considerations. Pp. 371 U. S. 54-55.

(c) Proscribe "temporary" refusals by a distributor to deal on less than a block basis, except that a distributor may briefly defer licensing or selling to a customer pending the expeditious conclusion chanroblesvirtualawlibrary

Page 371 U. S. 39

of bona fide negotiations already being conducted with a competing station on a proposal wherein the distributor has simultaneously offered to license or sell films either individually or in a package. P. 371 U. S. 55.

189 F.Supp. 373, judgments vacated and causes remanded.





Back
ChanRobles™ LawTube

google search for chanrobles.com Search for www.chanrobles.com


Supreme Court Decisions Philippine Supreme Court DecisionsUS Supreme Court Decisions



www.chanrobles.us




QUICK SEARCH

cralaw

Browse By ->> Volume


cralaw

Browse By ->> Year


cralaw

  Copyright © ChanRobles Publishing Company | Disclaimer | E-mail Restrictions
ChanRobles™ Virtual Law Library | chanrobles.com™
 
RED