The United States sued four corporations and two individuals for violating sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Act by granting exclusive privileges that unreasonably restrained competition. The District Court erred by not recognizing the anticompetitive effects of these exclusive privileges. However, the court found that there was no conspiracy between the appellee exhibitors or between them and the distributors that violated the Act. The court also found that the agreements under which films were distributed were not in restraint of trade, and that the appellees did not monopolize or attempt to monopolize the licensing or supply of film. The court further found that the appellees did not conspire to obtain exclusive privileges in selecting films before they were made available to any competing exhibitor, and that there was no agreement between defendants and distributors granting defendants unreasonable clearances. Additionally, the court found that the appellees did not compel or attempt to compel distributors to grant them privileges not granted to their competitors or which gave them any substantial advantage over their competitors. Finally, the court found that the appellees did not condition the licensing of films in any competitive situation on the licensing of such films in a non-competitive situation, or vice versa.
LSD+ gives you access to over 50,000 case briefs, more than anyone else. Be the first to email us the website of a case brief product that offers you more case briefs and we'll give you a free year of LSD+.
Unlimited access. Read as much content as you want during your trial with no device limitations. Cancel any time during your trial and keep access for the full 14 days.
Lawyers and judges love to use big words. And Latin, for some reason.
Highlight a legal term in LSD Briefs and get an instant, plain English definition. Try highlighting contract or specific performance. No need to search or read through a list of definitions, simply highlight the words you don’t know and our LSDefine integration will instantly give you a definition to any of over 30,000 legal terms.
DeepDive allows you to explore legal cases like never before. DeepDive offers multiple levels of case summaries, which empowers you to quickly and easily find the information you need to stay on top of readings. Easily navigate through summary levels and click on any text to get more detail, all the way down to the original legal case text.
Our proprietary state-of-the-art system can instantly brief over 6,000,000 US cases. That means we can probably brief that case that your professor assigned last night when she sent you a poorly scanned pdf and told you to read every third paragraph. Or maybe she uploaded it to Canvas and didn’t really tell you to read it, but you know you probably should. Tenure does wild things to good people.
Study groups are a great way to learn and explore a case. LSD has chat rooms for each case to let you ask questions across the community and hear what other students struggled with and how they put it all together. Learn the key points of every case from other LSD+ users and share your knowledge with LSD High Points.
Don’t settle for mistakes in briefs that have been there for 10 years and never fixed. Find an issue or something missing from a brief? Down vote and we will make improvements. All of our case brief editors graduated from from T14 law schools.