Changes

The Court relied on respected economic analysts to conclude that vertical price restraints can have procompetitive effects and thus should be judged by the [[rule of reason]]:

The Court relied on respected economic analysts to conclude that vertical price restraints can have procompetitive effects and thus should be judged by the [[rule of reason]]:

:"Minimum resale price maintenance can stimulate interbrand competition among manufacturers selling different brands of the same type of product by reducing intrabrand competition among retailers selling the same brand. This is important because the antitrust laws' primary purpose ... is to protect interbrand competition."

:"Minimum resale price maintenance can stimulate interbrand competition -- the competition among manufacturers selling different brands of the same type of product -- by reducing intrabrand competition -- the competition among retailers selling the same brand. See id., at 51-52, 97 S. Ct. 2549, 53 L. Ed. 2d 568. The promotion of interbrand competition is important because 'the primary purpose of the antitrust laws is to protect [this type of] competition.' Khan, 522 U.S., at 15, 118 S. Ct. 275, 139 L. Ed. 2d 199."

Justice [[Anthony Kennedy]] wrote the decision and was joined by the [[conservative]] wing of the Court.

Justice [[Anthony Kennedy]] wrote the decision and was joined by the [[conservative]] wing of the Court.