Changes

The rule of reason does not govern all restraints.  The [[per se]] rule, treating categories of restraints as necessarily illegal, eliminates the need to study the reasonableness of an individual restraint in light of the real market forces at work, ''Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp.'', 485 U.S. 717, 723 (1988); and, it must be acknowledged, the per se rule can give clear guidance for certain conduct. Restraints that are per se unlawful include horizontal agreements among competitors to fix prices, or to divide markets, ''see Palmer v. BRG of Ga., Inc.'', 498 U.S. 46, 49-50 (1990) (per curiam).

The rule of reason does not govern all restraints.  The [[per se]] rule, treating categories of restraints as necessarily illegal, eliminates the need to study the reasonableness of an individual restraint in light of the real market forces at work, ''Business Electronics Corp. v. Sharp Electronics Corp.'', 485 U.S. 717, 723 (1988); and, it must be acknowledged, the per se rule can give clear guidance for certain conduct. Restraints that are per se unlawful include horizontal agreements among competitors to fix prices, or to divide markets, ''see Palmer v. BRG of Ga., Inc.'', 498 U.S. 46, 49-50 (1990) (per curiam).

 

[[category:United States Supreme Court Cases]]

[[category:US Supreme Court Cases]]

[[category:antitrust]]

[[category:antitrust]]