Leegin v. PSKS: New Standard, New Challenges

Ashley Doty
{"title":"Leegin v. PSKS: New Standard, New Challenges","authors":"Ashley Doty","doi":"10.15779/Z384X3W","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc v. PSKS, Inc., the Supreme Court, taking heed of years of economic research identifying procompetitive benefits of vertical resale price maintenance (RPM), declared that the practice shall be evaluated under the rule of reason analysis. In a 5-4 split, the Court explicitly overruled Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., in which ninety-six years ago, the Court pronounced RPM to be per se illegal. This paper argues that the Court's decision was correct, but notes that the new standard creates a whole host of new problems, from uncertainty for market players, to a potential adverse interaction with the First Sale Doctrine in patent law.","PeriodicalId":281709,"journal":{"name":"Intellectual Property Law eJournal","volume":"34 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2008-04-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"5","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Intellectual Property Law eJournal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.15779/Z384X3W","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 5

Abstract

In Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc v. PSKS, Inc., the Supreme Court, taking heed of years of economic research identifying procompetitive benefits of vertical resale price maintenance (RPM), declared that the practice shall be evaluated under the rule of reason analysis. In a 5-4 split, the Court explicitly overruled Dr. Miles Medical Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co., in which ninety-six years ago, the Court pronounced RPM to be per se illegal. This paper argues that the Court's decision was correct, but notes that the new standard creates a whole host of new problems, from uncertainty for market players, to a potential adverse interaction with the First Sale Doctrine in patent law.
Leegin诉PSKS:新标准,新挑战
在Leegin Creative Leather Products, Inc.诉ppsks, Inc.一案中,最高法院根据多年来确定垂直转售价格维持(RPM)有利于竞争的经济研究,宣布这种做法应在理性分析的原则下进行评估。在5:4的分裂中,法院明确否决了迈尔斯医生医疗公司诉约翰·d·帕克父子公司案,96年前,法院宣布RPM本身是非法的。本文认为,法院的决定是正确的,但注意到新标准产生了一大堆新问题,从市场参与者的不确定性,到与专利法中的首次销售原则的潜在不利相互作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信