International Salt Co. v. United States

International Salt Co. v. United States

SCOTUSCase
Litigants=International Salt Co. v. United States
ArgueDate=October 16
ArgueYear=1947
DecideDate=November 10
DecideYear=1947
FullName=International Salt Company, Incorporated v. United States
USVol=332
USPage=392
Citation=68 S. Ct. 12; 92 L. Ed. 20; 1947 U.S. LEXIS 2979; 75 U.S.P.Q. (BNA) 184
Prior=Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York
Subsequent=
Holding=The Court held that the Sherman Act prohibits as "per se" violations all tying arrangements in which a product for which a seller has a legal monopoly, such as a patent requires purchasers to also buy a product for which the seller has no legal monopoly.
SCOTUS=1946-1949
Majority=Jackson
JoinMajority=Vinson, Douglas, Murphy, Rutledge; Frankfurter, Reed, Burton (in part)
Dissent=Frankfurter (in part)
JoinDissent=Reed, Burton
LawsApplied=Sherman Act, UnitedStatesCode|15|1

"International Salt Co. v. United States", 332 U.S. 392 (1947)ref|citation, was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the Sherman Act prohibits as "per se" violations all tying arrangements in which a product for which a seller has a legal monopoly, such as a patent, requires purchasers to also buy a product for which the seller has no legal monopoly.

Facts

The defendant International Salt Company had patented machines for processing salt and mixing or injecting it into various foodstuffs. The company required those who leased machines to also buy the salt or salt tablets processed through the machines from the defendant. The United States government brought a case charging the company of an antitrust violation through the tying of its products. The defendant replied to the charges with the contention that the tying arrangement was necessary to control the quality of salt being used in its machines, claiming that salt not meeting certain standards would damage the machines.

Issue

The Supreme Court was asked to determine whether such an arrangement was a "per se" violation of the antitrust laws.

Opinion of the Court

The Court held that this was a "per se" violation, announcing that it would be no defense to say that the associated product must meet certain standards because competitors must be given the opportunity to meet them. It was also no defense to say that customers could buy elsewhere if other vendors sold at lower prices, as the defendant could foreclose the market simply by meeting it.

ee also

*List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 332

External links

*ussc|332|392|Text of the opinion on Findlaw.com


Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

Игры ⚽ Поможем написать реферат

Look at other dictionaries:

  • United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. — SCOTUSCase Litigants=United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. ArgueDate=Feb. 9 11 ArgueYear=1948 DecideDate=May 3 DecideYear=1948 FullName=United States v. Paramount Pictures, Inc. et al USVol=334 USPage=131 Citation= Prior=Injunction granted, U …   Wikipedia

  • United States Of America — Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika …   Deutsch Wikipedia

  • United States of America — Vereinigte Staaten von Amerika …   Deutsch Wikipedia

  • United States journalism scandals — lists journalistic incidents in the United States which have been widely reported as journalistic scandals, or which were alleged to be scandalous by journalistic standards of the day.Notable reports of United States journalism scandalsCoverage… …   Wikipedia

  • United States Conference of Mayors — Current USCM President Antonio Villaraigosa Abbreviation USCM Formation 1932 …   Wikipedia

  • United States Pacific Command — Emblem of the United States Pacific Command. Active 1947–present …   Wikipedia

  • United States Australian Football League — Current season or competition: April–October Sport Australian rules football Founded 1996 Inaugural season 1997 …   Wikipedia

  • United States Air Forces in Europe — emblem Active 7 August 1945 Current …   Wikipedia

  • United States Army Reserve — Seal of the US Army Reserve Active 23 April 1908 present Country …   Wikipedia

  • List of United States Supreme Court cases, volume 332 — This is a list of all the United States Supreme Court cases from volume 332 of the United States Reports :* United States v. Petrillo , ussc|332|1|1947 * United States v. California , ussc|332|19|1947 * Adamson v. California , ussc|332|46|1947 *… …   Wikipedia

Share the article and excerpts

Direct link
Do a right-click on the link above
and select “Copy Link”