International Salt Co. v. United States, 332 U.S. 392 (1947), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the Sherman Act prohibits as per se violations all tying arrangements in which a product for which a seller has a legal monopoly, such as a patent, requires purchasers to buy as well a product for which the seller has no legal monopoly.
Attributes | Values |
---|
rdf:type
| |
rdfs:label
| - International Salt Co. v. United States (en)
|
rdfs:comment
| - International Salt Co. v. United States, 332 U.S. 392 (1947), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the Sherman Act prohibits as per se violations all tying arrangements in which a product for which a seller has a legal monopoly, such as a patent, requires purchasers to buy as well a product for which the seller has no legal monopoly. (en)
|
foaf:name
| - (en)
- International Salt Company, Incorporated v. United States (en)
|
dcterms:subject
| |
Wikipage page ID
| |
Wikipage revision ID
| |
Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
| |
Link from a Wikipage to an external page
| |
sameAs
| |
dbp:wikiPageUsesTemplate
| |
JoinMajority
| - Frankfurter, Reed, Burton (en)
- Vinson, Douglas, Murphy, Rutledge ; (en)
|
LawsApplied
| |
ParallelCitations
| |
Prior
| - Appeal from the District Court of the United States for the Southern District of New York (en)
|
USPage
| |
USVol
| |
ArgueDate
| |
ArgueYear
| |
case
| - International Salt Co. v. United States, (en)
|
DecideDate
| |
DecideYear
| |
fullname
| - International Salt Company, Incorporated v. United States (en)
|
Holding
| - The Court held that the Sherman Act prohibits as per se violations all tying arrangements in which a product for which a seller has a legal monopoly, such as a patent requires purchasers to buy a product as well for which the seller has no legal monopoly. (en)
|
justia
| |
Litigants
| - International Salt Co. v. United States (en)
|
majority
| |
loc
| |
has abstract
| - International Salt Co. v. United States, 332 U.S. 392 (1947), was a case in which the United States Supreme Court held that the Sherman Act prohibits as per se violations all tying arrangements in which a product for which a seller has a legal monopoly, such as a patent, requires purchasers to buy as well a product for which the seller has no legal monopoly. (en)
|
Concurrence/Dissent
| |
JoinConcurrence/Dissent
| |
prov:wasDerivedFrom
| |
page length (characters) of wiki page
| |
foaf:isPrimaryTopicOf
| |
is Link from a Wikipage to another Wikipage
of | |