NU Business Law Violation of The Antitrust Laws Discussion

Instructions

Goodward, a newly-hired newspaper reporter for The Cape Cod News, learned that the local cranberry growers had made an agreement under which they pooled their cranberry crops each year and sold them at what they determined to be a fair price. Goodward believes that such an agreement is in restraint of trade and a violation of the antitrust laws. Is he correct?

Responses to Classmates: Respond to a minimum of 2 of your classmates’ posts. In your responses, do you agree or disagree? Why?

Student#1 Restraint of trade requires some sort of agreement between market competitors. The activity that the local cranberry growers are doing isn’t limiting another business from entering the market of selling or buying cranberry. They simply have made the agreement under where they pooled their Carberry every year and have put a price to it where they believe it is a fair price for their work.

Antitrust laws are set to protect consumers by preventing unfair or ani competitive practices in the market that might affect consumer negatively. In the of the cranberry growers’ consumers haven’t made any comments or complaints regarding the prices of the cranberries that were sold by those growers. In addition, the discussion doesn’t mention anything in regard to having another party that was selling cranberries, for that matter those two violations that were presented by the reporter are not valid and the farmers are competing fairly.

Student#2 Goodward, a newly-hired newspaper reporter for The Cape Cod News, learned that the local cranberry growers had made an agreement under which they pooled their cranberry crops each year and sold them at what they determined to be a fair price. Goodward believes that such an agreement is in restraint of trade and a violation of the antitrust laws.

Ordinarily, Goodward would be correct regarding a violation of anti-trust. However, the Capper–Volstead Act (P.L. 67-146), the Co-operative Marketing Associations Act (7 U.S.C. 291, 292) was adopted by Congress on February 18, 1922. This act permits farmers to get together to collectively market their products which, in the absence of such enabling provisions, could result in antitrust action against them. Various stipulations go with the act. The most significant stipulation is concerning the conduct of the members. If any of the stipulation are broken, the members can be found in violation of antitrust laws. This act applies to associations of producers creating ,in effect, a single entity. The act also protects the general public against the possibility of undue price enhancement as a result of any monopoly position that a group of producers could legally achieve by getting together.