Home Business Page 15

Business

CME Group Software Engineer Guilty of Stealing Trade Secrets

CME Group Software Engineer Guilty of Stealing Trade Secrets

On September 19, 2012, the US Attorney’s Office in the Northern District of Illinois reported that Chunlai Yang pleaded guilty of two counts theft of trade secrets after working for CME Group for 11 years. 

Yang admitted to downloading over 10,000 files of CME source code which provide significant amounts of information about the Globex electronic trading platform.  The U.S. Attorney’s Office states that Yang made plans “to improve an electronic trading exchange in China as well.  All in all, the government estimates the potential loses between $50 million and $100 million, and Yang is arguing the potential losses were under $55.7 million. 

During his time at CME Group, Yang was responsible for writing code.  Because of his position, Yang had access to programs that maintained the Globex electronic trading platform.  The software programs were property of CME Group, but Yang had proceeded in downloading manuals and instructions on how the computer files operate. 

The U.S. Attorney’s Office concludes that Yang and two unnamed business affiliates were planning to open a business in China called the Tongmei Futures Exchange Software Technology Company (Gateway).  The purpose of the company was to increase trade volume to the Zhangjiagang Exchange, a Chinese chemical electronic trading exchange.  Yang was as far as contract negotiations with the Shangjigang Free Trade Board. 

Yang faces a maximum penalty of 10 years in prison and a $250,000 for each count.  The plea agreement will place Yang in prison for 70 to 87 months.  The sentencing is scheduled for February 20, 2013.

In addition, Yang agreed to forfeit his personal computers, electronic storage equipment, and more.  The personal computers and USB equipment contained the files he stole from CME Group. 

The United States is being represented Assistant United States Attorneys Barry Jonas and Paul Tzur. 

Source: Federal Bureau of Investigation

Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Sign Memorandum with Two Indian Authorities

Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission Sign Memorandum with Two Indian Authorities

On September 27, 2012, the US Department of Justice and the Federal Trade Commission signed a memorandum of understanding with the Government of India Ministry of Corporate Affairs as well as the Competition Commission of India.  The antitrust memorandum encourages increased cooperation between competition agencies in each country. 

The first key part of the MOU addresses cooperation.  The provision states that U.S. antitrust agencies and Indian authorities will cooperate and inform each other about competition policies and changes to enforcement in specific jurisdictions.  If the United States and India are investigating a similar matter, the two countries have agreed to cooperate. 

The second key part of the MOU stresses communication.  The provision states that United States and India will keep each other updated about all competition enforcement and policies addressing enforcement.  The provisions also states that the United States and India will engage in meetings from time to time in order to discuss policy and enforcement information. 

Joseph Wayland, the Acting Assistant Attorney General, stated, “We value our relationship with the Indian Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the Competition Commission of India.  We know that this memorandum of understanding will enhance that relationship in the years ahead, as we work together to ensure that markets are open and competitive, by identifying and remedying anticompetitive behavior.” 

The memorandum was signed by Wayland, Chairman Jon Leibowitz under the FTC, Nirupama Rao, the Indian Ambassador to the United States for the Indian Ministry of Corporate Affairs, and CCI Chairman Ashok Chawla.

Chairman Leibowitz commented, “We are delighted to enter into this memorandum of understanding with the Indian Ministry of Corporate Affairs and the Competition Commission of India.  It will strengthen the already excellent relations among the U.S. and Indian competition authorities by further facilitating cooperation on policy and enforcement matters.”

Source: Department of Justice

The Home Business Ideas of Your Dreams!

The Home Business Ideas of Your Dreams!

A home
business is classified as a business maintained from an individual and/or
private residence. Home business ideas can vary from methodology of operations to
a part-time or full-time basis. There are a wide range of determinants involved
in the implementation of home business ideas, such as their legitimacy,
solvency, and legality.

What are some Home Business Ideas?

Online Home Business Ideas

Due the advents in technology enjoyed by citizens
of the world, a vast array of businesses can be conducted online (i.e., via the
internet). As a result, much of the commerce that takes place does so through
the internet marketplace, which is also known as E-Commerce. Home business
ideas can range from products and services that can be purchased and shipped
from the comfort of one’s home, such as the following:

Web design, consultation, and development;

Freelance editing, writing, and research;

Moderation, upkeep, and maintenance of websites;

The production and sale of goods or products.

In-house Home Business Ideas


Home business ideas can also include products or
services that can be conducted using an individual home or residence as a base
of operations. For example, it is not uncommon for individuals to utilize their
homes as ad-hoc offices and/or meeting places in which business is conducted. The
following are some examples of home business ideas that can be conducted from
one’s home:

Consultation services, event planning, and
project management
;

Lessons, classes, and educational workshops conducted from the
home
;

Home assembly and manufacturing;

Retail, resale, wholesale, and consignment operations.

Legality of a Home Business

The parameters and protocols surrounding both the
establishment and maintenance of a home business vary on an individual basis
and in conjunction with the established legality, taxation, and operations of
business law and legislation. All home business documentation should be
completed to the fullest extent in a meticulous fashion. In the event that an
individual experiences difficulty completing or understanding the requirements
of establishing a home business, they are encouraged to consult an attorney
specializing in employment, business, copyright, and labor law.
 

Legitimate Home Business Ideas 

An attorney should be consulted prior to the
establishment of any business endeavor in the event that an individual is not
well-versed in business law practice. Although there exists a multitude of home
business ideas, an individual interested in establishing a home business is
encouraged to explore their validity and legitimacy, as well as their
originality. Copyright violations are illegal, and one’s protection from
lawsuits and citations are in the best interest of any individual. The legal
review of the originality and legitimacy of a particular home business idea by
a legal professional can allow for added protection, legal insight, and strict
adherence with all applicable laws.
 

Avoiding Fraudulent Home Business Ideas

Due to the desire for home business ideas, there
exist many scams and fraudulent practices that consist of ‘get-rich-quick’
schemes. Despite any promises of guaranteed success, these practices should be
avoided at all costs. In the event of uncertainty in regards to the validity of
a home business idea or opportunity, an attorney or accredited business
resource should always be consulted prior to engaging in the home business
idea.
 

Case Bond

Case Bond

 


What is a Case Bond?

 

A case bond occurs when a company or firm buys full or partial rights to the settlement of the lawsuit before or while litigation is still occurring.  Litigation is extremely expensive, and high-profile cases can have attorneys’ fees and court costs amount to hundreds of thousands of dollars.  The bond is offered to the litigant while the case is moving through court so they can pay for personal expenses. 

 

What Happens if the Litigant Loses the Case?

 

Such a bond is sometimes a risky investment because the litigant is not required to pay anything to the company or firm that issued the bond if they lose the case.  If the litigant wins the case, the bond automatically matures and the litigation pays for the bond with the funds obtained from the settlement. 

 

Advantages and Disadvantages of a Case Bond

 

The advantages of such a bond allow a litigant to pay for expenses while the case is moving through court.  The litigant may have a large amount of bills depending on the case, such as medical bills, living expenses, and even attorneys’ fees that need paid immediately.  The bond allows the litigant to pay for these expenses and remain receive less intimidation of the court costs.

 

A common strategy used by large companies is to keep appealing the case to run up court costs and attorneys’ fees.  The litigant thus becomes intimidated and may drop the case if the results are questionable.  The bond allows the litigant to avoid other options of paying for the case like taking out a home equity line of credit or taking out a private loan. 

 

The obvious disadvantage to agreeing to a case bond is being left with little or no settlement money after the case comes to an end.  Such bonds come along with a fee as well.  This fee can be large in some cases and offsets some of the risk taken on by the firm after issuing the bond.  If the plaintiff wins the case, they will have to pay the fee along with the bond, which can further deplete their settlement money. 

 

Talk with an Attorney before Agreeing to a Case Bond

 

It’s imperative that you speak with your attorney before agreeing to such a bond.  Your attorney will be able to tell you about the risks involved and your chances of winning the case.  The attorney can also help you fill out paperwork associated with the bond.  The litigant is required to sign documents that give the bond company rights to the compensation at the end of the case. 

 

Attorneys can issue a bond is some cases as well.  The firm may issue the bond and provide conditions in the settlement agreement for the plaintiff to reimburse expenses at the end of the case—especially if the attorney is working on contingency. 

Economic Opportunity Act Text

Economic Opportunity Act Text

FINDINGS AND DECLARATION OF PURPOSE SEC. 2. Although the economic well-being and prosperity of the United States have progressed to a level surpassing any achieved in world history, and although these benefits are widely shared throughout the Nation, poverty continues to be the lot of a substantial number of our people. The United States can achieve its full economic and social potential as a nation only if every individual has the opportunity to contribute to the full extent of his capabilities and to participate in the workings of our society. It is, therefore, the policy of the United States to eliminate the paradox of poverty in the midst of plenty in this Nation by opening to everyone the opportunity for education and training, the opportunity to work, and the opportunity to live in decency and dignity. It is the purpose of this Act to strengthen, supplement, and coordinate efforts in furtherance of that policy.

 


TITLE I–YOUTH PROGRAMS

 


PART A–JOB CORPS

 


STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

 


SEC. 101. The purpose of this part is to prepare for the responsibilities of citizenship and to increase the employability of young men and young women aged sixteen through twenty-one by providing them in rural and urban residential centers with education, vocational training, useful work experience, including work directed toward the conservation of natural resources, and other appropriate activities.

 


ESTABLISHMENT OF JOB CORPS

 


SEC. 102. In order to carry out the purposes of this part, there is hereby established within the Office of Economic Opportunity (hereinafter referred to as the "Office"), established by title VI, a Job Corps (herinafter referred to as the "Corps").

 


JOB CORPS PROGRAM

 


SEC. 103. The Director of the Office (herinafter referred to as the "Director") is authorized to–

 


(a) enter into agreements with any Federal, State, or local agency or private organization for the establishment and operation, in rural and urban areas, of conservation camps and training centers and for the provision of such facilities and services as in his judgment are needed to carry out the purposes of this part,. . . .

 


PART B–WORK-TRAINING PROGRAMS

 


STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

 


SEC. 111. The purpose of this part is to provide useful work experience opportunities for unemployed young men and young women, through participation in State and community work-training programs, so that their employability may be increased or their education resumed or continued and so that public agencies and private nonprofit organizations (other than political parties) will be enabled to carry out programs which will permit or contribute to an undertaking or service in the public interest that would not otherwise be provided, or will contribute to the conservation and development of natural resources and recreational areas. . . .

 


PART C–WORK-STUDY PROGRAMS

 


STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

 


The purpose of this part is to stimulate and promote the part-time employment of students in institutions of higher education who are from low-income families and are in need of the earnings from such employment to pursue courses of study at such institutions. . . .

 


TITLE II–URBAN AND RURAL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS

 


PART A–GENERAL COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS

 


STATEMENT OF PURPOSE

 


SEC. 201. The purpose of this part is to provide stimulation and incentive for urban and rural communities to mobilize their resources to combat poverty through community action programs.

 


COMMUNITY ACTION PROGRAMS

 


SEC. 202. (a) The term "community action program" means a program– . . . .

 


(2) which provides services, assistance, and other activities of sufficient scope and size to give promise of progress toward elimination of poverty or a cause or causes of poverty through developing employment opportunities, improving human performance, motivation, and productivity, or bettering the conditions under which people live, learn, and work;

 


(3) which is developed, conducted, and administered with the maximum feasible participation of residents of the areas and members of the groups served; and

 


(4) which is conducted, administered, or coordinated by a public or private nonprofit agency (other than a political party), or a combination thereof.

Minerals Separation Limited

Minerals Separation Limited

 


History of Minerals Separation Limited

The company was a small company based out of London that revolutionized a technique for ore extraction.  Before the technique was invented, other companies had problems separating silver, lead, and zinc from ore that was mined deep under the ground.  Most of the ore near the surface was oxidized which made it easier to smelt, but no technique was economical for ore at greater depths.

In 1905, Minerals Separation Limited improved a process that allowed for certain minerals to float on top of a mixture of water and chemicals and be skimmed off.  The original process proved successful but it was not possible on an industrial scale.  The process was revolutionized in 1905 when Minerals Separation added a small amount of oil to the pulp and added violent aeration to the mixture with machines. 

In July of 1906, a Belgium chemist by the name of Auguste De Bavay patented a process that improved the flotation process developed by Minerals Separation Limited and allowed zinc and silver-lead conglomerates to be separated from the pulp.  Between 1910 and 1912, Minerals Separation obtained a license from De Bavay and traded patents.

Minerals Separation v. Butte & Superior Mining Company

This case was argued on March 19, 1919 in a Circuit Court of Appeals after Minerals Separation Limited claimed Butte & Superior Mining Company committed patent infringement.  There were 13 claims relating to the patent infringement, but the case mainly addressed Butte & Superior’s use of oils in quantities less than one-half of 1 percent during the ore extraction. 

Minerals Separation claimed that the amount of oil was “critical” because it was the exact amount needed to extract the minerals from the ore.  The specification of the amount was included in the patent. 

The court stated the following about the specified amount of oil: “Such variation of treatment must be within the scope of the claims, and the certainty which the law requires in patents is not great than is reasonable, having regard to their subject-matter.  The process is one for dealing with a large class of substances and the range of treatment within the terms of the claims, while leaving something to the skill of persons applying the invention, is clearly sufficiently definite to guide those skilled in the art to its successful application, as the evidence abundantly shows.  This satisfies the law.”

Butte and Superior claimed that from January 9, 1917 to the time of the trial that they used more than 1 percent on the ore.  The mixture was made up of 18 percent pine oil, 12 percent of kerosene oil, and 70 percent fuel oil.  They claimed they used 30 pounds of the mixture on a ton of ore, which would equal 1.5 percent. 

However, Minerals Separation Limited claimed the kerosene and fuel oil were valueless in the process of extraction and claimed the pine oil equaled a percentage that infringed on the patent.  The case was remanded to the District Court for further opinions and proceedings. 

Home Based Business Opportunities

Home Based Business Opportunities

What are Home Based Business Opportunities?
 
A home based business opportunity is any type of business that does not require a physical place of business, other than your residence.  Home based business opportunities have become much more popular in recent years, due to global connectivity by email, the internet, and smart phone devices.  
How to run a Home Based Business Opportunity
1. The first step in running your home business opportunity is to ensure that your business can be adequately run out of your home.  If your business requires in person communication, meeting with clients, or visibility to the public, you may have issues with your business not having a physical location.  Instead, businesses that can be done completely over the phone or electronic communication are adept for a home based business opportunity.   
2. Once you have determined your business can be run from home, you must ensure that you can work at home.  Working at home can be difficult for many people, due to the possible distractions, lack of leaving your home during the day, and the isolation that may occur.  It is important that you realize that working from home is very different than working in an outside place of business.  You will also need to ensure that your home is equipped to handle your business.  You will need some space (such as a room set aside as an office), low noise levels, and a steady communication network.  
3. After you have determined that a home based business opportunity is right for you, you will need to determine what type of business you want to run and at what level you want to run it.  The most common home based businesses are purchasing and seeking items over internet markets, such as EBAY or craigslist.  Products that you produce or items secured for resale have boomed in recent years due to the popularity of these types of websites that bring purchasers and sellers together over electronic space.  Other businesses may also be available, such as the writing and editing of documents, consulting, or even communication jobs.  
4. Finally, once you have chosen a home based business opportunity and determined that you and your home are equipped to handle it, you should begin to implement the business into your home.  Prepare your workspace, set aside a place for any needed instruments of the trade, and start to build your client base.  When you start putting your business plan into place, you will probably need to make many changes and adapt to unforeseen circumstances.   
Maintaining and Updating your Home Business Opportunity.  
You home based business opportunity will need constant maintenance and updates in order to survive.  Just like any business with a physical building, you will need to keep track of any billing, accounting, and legal work that is necessary to keep your business running.  You will need to document your accounts receivable and business expenses and have them prepared for taxation.  If your business starts to grow, you may need to consider bringing in additional employees, which may or may not be able to work from their home or from yours.
Updating your home business is always something you need to consider.  All businesses must adapt or they face failure from new and more efficient businesses.  Consider watching what other home businesses do and try to learn from their mistakes or their successes.  

Property Asset Management

Property Asset Management

Property management is an aspect of real estate that deals with maintenance and other needs for property with the purpose of maximizing and preserving the value of the property.  The property may be managed by the property owner, tenant, or contracted property management company.
Who has the responsibility of property management?
Real estate companies have the initial responsibility of property management with their interest in the property management is to maximize the value of the property to potential buyers.  After the duty of property management has passed to the buyer, the property owner and the tenant must agree to a level of property management duties.  This may range from full responsibility on the tenant or landlord or a hybridized agreement that has the landlord responsible for major repairs and other aspects of property management.
What are property management companies?
Property management companies act on behalf of a landlord and interact with the tenants of a property.  The property management company may collect rent, find tenants and contract for repairs.  In many situations, the property management company fulfills the role of the property owner in all cases, including disputes stemming from non-payment of rent, eviction and neighbor complaints.  Requirements for property management companies vary by state with some states requiring real estate licensing for property management companies.  This is to ensure that the property management companies are abreast of real estate law in the state and will abide by those laws when dealing with tenants.
What is property management software?
There are a number of property management software available that can help property owners manage the expenses and rental income from properties.  Additional features in property management software include the ability to general rental documents, such as lease agreements and generate tax forms in compliance with state and local tax laws.  Popular developers of property management software include Quicken, MDansby and Advanced Management Systems.  Property management software can be online subscription based or Graphical User Interface based for use on personal computers for a flat fee.  Some programs have bulk pricing for use on multiple computers.  This will be useful for property management companies that wish to automate some of their systems.
What is asset management?
Unlike property management, which is the management of a tangible investment, assets management is primarily the management of investment funds such as stocks, commodities and equity funds.  Asset management is broken up into fixed income, equity and alternative investments, which include hedge funds, and real estate investment.  Individuals that work within assets management may specialize in any of the previously mentioned categories, helping individuals invest and manage their assets wisely.  Assets management is measured against a benchmark, which denotes how well it is “performing” which is a measure of how well the investment returns are comparable to other similar assets under management.  The performance of assets is the best way to determine if the asset manager is investing your assets safely.

Clayton Antitrust Act

Clayton Antitrust Act

 
 
 
What is the Clayton Anti-Trust Act?
 
 
The Clayton Anti-Trust Act of 1914 was an addition to the Sherman Antitrust Act of 1890 that protected consumers against harmful, anti-competitive business arrangements such as monopolies and cartels by defining prohibitions and an enforcement scheme.
 
 
Discussion of Price Discrimination
 
 
The Clayton Anti-Trust Act discusses the effects of price discrimination, which is the sale of goods of services by an entity at different prices to different groups of consumers.  This is considered an anti-competitive practice as it indicates the power of the entity to fix and dictate prices for goods and services in order to hamper or eradicate competition.  In this pricing scheme, the commercial entity will charge every consumer individually according to his or her willing to pay for the good or service.  This can be harmful the consumer as it eliminates the consumer surplus, which would have saved the consumer money.  Instead, paying exactly what the consumer is willing to pay, the consumer is likely to pay far beyond the manufacturing costs of the item.
 
 
Price discrimination may hurt suppliers as well buy making it difficult to compete with artificially low prices.  If a large company seeking to increase its market share decides to price goods in a market far below what any other supplier can afford to charge, then the supplier will collapse under this predatory pricing scheme.  Once the larger commercial interest achieves dominance over a good or service market, they may dictate pricing as they please, which is an anti-competitive measure that the Clayton Anti-trust Act attempts to blunt.  The bill’s text specifically states that price discrimination tends to “create monopolies in any line of commerce.”
 
 
In terms of this act, while it cannot outlaw price discrimination, it can control agreements and dealings that would constitute price discrimination and take rectification measures.
 
 
Mergers and Acquisitions
 
 
This is one of the more important features of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act and remains in effect today.  This requires commercial entities that intend to form larger enterprises through mergers and acquisitions notify the Federal Trade Commission and the Department of Justice Antitrust Division if they exceed certain thresholds that are dependent on GDP and adjusted on a yearly basis.  The controls on mergers and acquisitions prevent one entity from gaining an unfair advantage and dominating a market, which would allow it to engage in anti-competitive pricing and other abuses of their controlling interest.  It is the responsibility of government authorities to ensure that mergers will not substantially lessen competition.
 
 
The Clayton Anti-Trust Act specifically mentions holding companies as another means to achieve a monopoly through holding the stocks of other companies in the same manner as the trusts that the Sherman Act attempted to eradicate.
 
 
Exclusive sales contracts
 
 
Also known as exclusive dealing, this is mostly illegal in the US unless registered and approved by the federal government.  It prevents the entry of new firms into the market by preventing potential suppliers or outlets from dealing with these new firms.  This presents a type of non-competitive market condition called vertical integration that can be potentially harmful to the consumer if the supplier has control over all phases of the manufacturer of the product, from the raw material extraction to final resale, effectively allowing them to set an unfair price due to lowered input costs.  If this advantage affects the competitiveness of the markets, then enforcement may be necessary.  
 
 
The Clayton Anti-Trust Act restricts the use of exclusive sales contracts “tying” a supplier to another commercial interest to allow for a competitive marketplace with pricing determined by the market and not through exclusive dealings.  Third line forcing, which is a supplier compelling the consumer to purchase goods from a third party and refusing to supply the product if that condition is not agreed to, is also prohibited.  It is anti-competitive to tie the goods of one supplier to another and compel the consumer to abide by that agreement.  An example would be a computer manufacturer refusing to let a consumer buy the product without also purchasing a third party desk to place the computer on.  This arrangement can also be used to fix the price of products by exploiting an advantage that one product has on the market.
 
 
Corporate structure
 
 
Section 8 of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act prohibits an individual from serving as the director of more than one corporation, also a key indicator of an unfair market advantage or corporate loophole.
 
 
In regards to unions
 
 
The Clayton Anti-Trust Act does not cover unions as these organizations represent the labor of workers, which is neither a “commodity nor article of commerce.”  Actions by the union are not considered anti-competitive and they may engage in activities against the employer, such as striking.  This contrasts to the preceding Sherman Anti-trust Act that was sometimes used as part of “union busting” due to the dubious classification of unions as “cartels of human labor.” Therefore, injunctions could no longer be used to end most labor actions.
 
 
Enforcement of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act
 
 
The Anti-Trust Division of the US Department of Justice works with the Federal Trade Commission to regulate and if necessary, file suit against violators of anti-trust laws.  For example, the Department of Justice may bring suit against several service providers that are colluding on prices offered to consumers.  This constitutes a cartel of sorts and is an anti-competitive environment that harms consumers.  Although collusion may resolve itself rise the rise of new firms or one commercial interest cheating the others, the government regulators can also get involved and break up the cartel.
 
 
Criticism
 
 
Some have criticized government regulations such as the Sherman Anti-trust Act and the Clayton Anti-Trust Act as stifling innovation and creating undue inefficiency in the free market.  These critics argue that larger commercial entities have the ability and incentive to continue innovation to maintain their market share and that supporting smaller, less capable enterprises in the name of competitiveness is inherently anti-competitive.  These proponents also strongly believe in the self-correcting nature of markets and the eventuality that inefficient collusive enterprises that work contrary to consumers will ultimately fail.
 
 
This legislation is also accused of destroying “economies of scale” by preventing business expansion that in turn prevents cost lowering mechanisms such as bulk buying, long term contracts and specialization.  Larger commercial enterprises also get better interest rates from banks for long term borrowing.  Increasing economies of scale create natural monopolies that usually benefit the consumer as the ever expanding commercial interest gets increasing capable of providing lower cost goods and widespread commercial success from expanding in new markets.
 
 

Clayton Anti-Trust Act Text

Clayton Anti-Trust Act Text

Full Text of the Clayton Anti-Trust Act
Sec. 13. Discrimination in price, services, or facilities (§ 2 of the Clayton Act)
(a) Price; selection of customers
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, either directly or indirectly, to discriminate in price between different purchasers of commodities of like grade and quality, where either or any of the purchases involved in such discrimination are in commerce, where such commodities are sold for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, and where the effect of such discrimination may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce, or to injure, destroy, or prevent competition with any person who either grants or knowingly receives the benefit of such discrimination, or with customers of either of them: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall prevent differentials which make only due allowance for differences in the cost of manufacture, sale, or delivery resulting from the differing methods or quantities in which such commodities are to such purchasers sold or delivered: Provided, however, That the Federal Trade Commission may, after due investigation and hearing to all interested parties, fix and establish quantity limits, and revise the same as it finds necessary, as to particular commodities or classes of commodities, where it finds that available purchasers in greater quantities are so few as to render differentials on account thereof unjustly discriminatory or promotive of monopoly in any line of commerce; and the foregoing shall then not be construed to permit differentials based on differences in quantities greater than those so fixed and established: And provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent persons engaged in selling goods, wares, or merchandise in commerce from selecting their own customers in bona fide transactions and not in restraint of trade: And provided further, That nothing herein contained shall prevent price changes from time to time where in response to changing conditions affecting the market for or the marketability of the goods concerned, such as but not limited to actual or imminent deterioration of perishable goods, obsolescence of seasonal goods, distress sales under court process, or sales in good faith in discontinuance of business in the goods concerned.
(b) Burden of rebutting prima-facie case of discrimination
Upon proof being made, at any hearing on a complaint under this section, that there has been discrimination in price or services or facilities furnished, the burden of rebutting the prima-facie case thus made by showing justification shall be upon the person charged with a violation of this section, and unless justification shall be affirmatively shown, the Commission is authorized to issue an order terminating the discrimination: Provided, however, That nothing herein contained shall prevent a seller rebutting the prima-facie case thus made by showing that his lower price or the furnishing of services or facilities to any purchaser or purchasers was made in good faith to meet an equally low price of a competitor, or the services or facilities furnished by a competitor.
(c) Payment or acceptance of commission, brokerage, or other compensation
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to pay or grant, or to receive or accept, anything of value as a commission, brokerage, or other compensation, or any allowance or discount in lieu thereof, except for services rendered in connection with the sale or purchase of goods, wares, or merchandise, either to the other party to such transaction or to an agent, representative, or other intermediary therein where such intermediary is acting in fact for or in behalf, or is subject to the direct or indirect control, of any party to such transaction other than the person by whom such compensation is so granted or paid.
(d) Payment for services or facilities for processing or sale
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce to pay or contact for the payment of anything of value to or for the benefit of a customer of such person in the course of such commerce as compensation or in consideration for any services or facilities furnished by or through such customer in connection with the processing, handling, sale, or offering for sale of any products or commodities manufactured, sold, or offered for sale by such person, unless such payment or consideration is available on proportionally equal terms to all other customers competing in the distribution of such products or commodities.
(e) Furnishing services or facilities for processing, handling, etc.
It shall be unlawful for any person to discriminate in favor of one purchaser against another purchaser or purchasers of a commodity bought for resale, with or without processing, by contracting to furnish or furnishing, or by contributing to the furnishing of, any services or facilities connected with the processing, handling, sale, or offering for sale of such commodity so purchased upon terms not accorded to all purchasers on proportionally equal terms.
(f) Knowingly inducing or receiving discriminatory price
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, knowingly to induce or receive a discrimination in price which is prohibited by this section.
 Sec. 13a. Discrimination in rebates, discounts, or advertising service charges; underselling in particular localities; penalties
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to be a party to, or assist in, any transaction of sale, or contract to sell, which discriminates to his knowledge against competitors of the purchaser, in that, any discount, rebate, allowance, or advertising service charge is granted to the purchaser over and above any discount, rebate, allowance, or advertising service charge available at the time of such transaction to said competitors in respect of a sale of goods of like grade, quality, and quantity; to sell, or contract to sell, goods in any part of the United States at prices lower than those exacted by said person elsewhere in the United States for the purpose of destroying competition, or eliminating a competitor in such part of the United States; or, to sell, or contract to sell, goods at unreasonably low prices for the purpose of destroying competition or eliminating a competitor.
Any person violating any of the provisions of this section shall, upon conviction thereof, be fined not more than $5,000 or imprisoned not more than one year, or both.
 Sec. 13b. Cooperative association; return of net earnings or surplus
Nothing in this Act shall prevent a cooperative association from returning to its members, producers, or consumers the whole, or any part of, the net earnings or surplus resulting from its trading operations, in proportion to their purchases or sales from, to, or through the association.
 Sec. 13c. Exemption of non-profit institutions from price discrimination provisions
Nothing in the Act approved June 19, 1936, known as the Robinson-Patman Antidiscrimination Act, shall apply to purchases of their supplies for their own use by schools, colleges, universities, public libraries, churches, hospitals, and charitable institutions not operated for profit.
 Sec. 14. Sale, etc., on agreement not to use goods of competitor (§ 3 of the Clayton Act)
It shall be unlawful for any person engaged in commerce, in the course of such commerce, to lease or make a sale or contract for sale of goods, wares, merchandise, machinery, supplies, or other commodities, whether patented or unpatented, for use, consumption, or resale within the United States or any Territory thereof or the District of Columbia or any insular possession or other place under the jurisdiction of the United States, or fix a price charged therefor, or discount from, or rebate upon, such price, on the condition, agreement, or understanding that the lessee or purchaser thereof shall not use or deal in the goods, wares, merchandise, machinery, supplies, or other commodities of a competitor or competitors of the lessor or seller, where the effect of such lease, sale, or contract for sale or such condition, agreement, or understanding may be to substantially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly in any line of commerce.
 Sec. 15. Suits by persons injured (§ 4 of the Clayton Act)
(a) Amount of recovery; prejudgment interest
Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section, any person who shall be injured in his business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws may sue therefor in any district court of the United States in the district in which the defendant resides or is found or has an agent, without respect to the amount in controversy, and shall recover threefold the damages by him sustained, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee. The court may award under this section, pursuant to a motion by such person promptly made, simple interest on actual damages for the period beginning on the date of service of such person’s pleading setting forth a claim under the antitrust laws and ending on the date of judgment, or for any shorter period therein, if the court finds that the award of such interest for such period is just in the circumstances. In determining whether an award of interest under this section for any period is just in the circumstances, the court shall consider only –
(1) whether such person or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, made motions or asserted claims or defenses so lacking in merit as to show that such party or representative acted intentionally for delay, or otherwise acted in bad faith;
(2) whether, in the course of the action involved, such person or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, violated any applicable rule, statute, or court order providing for sanctions for dilatory behavior or otherwise providing for expeditious proceedings; and
(3) whether such person or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, engaged in conduct primarily for the purpose of delaying the litigation or increasing the cost thereof.
(b) Amount of damages payable to foreign states and instrumentalities of foreign states
(1) Except as provided in paragraph (2), any person who is a foreign state may not recover under subsection (a) of this section an amount in excess of the actual damages sustained by it and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee.
(2) Paragraph (1) shall not apply to a foreign state if –
(A) such foreign state would be denied, under section 1605(a)(2) of title 28, immunity in a case in which the action is based upon a commercial activity, or an act, that is the subject matter of its claim under this section;
(B) such foreign state waives all defenses based upon or arising out of its status as a foreign state, to any claims brought against it in the same action;
(C) such foreign state engages primarily in commercial activities; and
(D) such foreign state does not function, with respect to the commercial activity, or the act, that is the subject matter of its claim under this section as a procurement entity for itself or for another foreign state.
 Sec. 15a. Suits by United States; amount of recovery; prejudgment interest (§ 4a of the Clayton Act)
Whenever the United States is hereafter injured in its business or property by reason of anything forbidden in the antitrust laws it may sue therefor in the United States district court for the district in which the defendant resides or is found or has an agent, without respect to the amount in controversy, and shall recover threefold the damages by it sustained and the cost of suit. The court may award under this section, pursuant to a motion by the United States promptly made, simple interest on actual damages for the period beginning on the date of service of the pleading of the United States setting forth a claim under the antitrust laws and ending on the date of judgment, or for any shorter period therein, if the court finds that the award of such interest for such period is just in the circumstances. In determining whether an award of interest under this section for any period is just in the circumstances, the court shall consider only –
(1) whether the United States or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, made motions or asserted claims or defenses so lacking in merit as to show that such party or representative acted intentionally for delay or otherwise acted in bad faith;
(2) whether, in the course of the action involved, the United States or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, violated any applicable rule, statute, or court order providing for sanctions for dilatory behavior or otherwise providing for expeditious proceedings;
(3) whether the United States or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, engaged in conduct primarily for the purpose of delaying the litigation or increasing the cost thereof; and
(4) whether the award of such interest is necessary to compensate the United States adequately for the injury sustained by the United States.
 Sec. 15b. Limitation of actions (§ 4b. of the Clayton Act)
Any action to enforce any cause of action under section 15, 15a, or 15c of this title shall be forever barred unless commenced within four years after the cause of action accrued. No cause of action barred under existing law on the effective date of this Act shall be revived by this Act.
 Sec. 15c. Actions by State attorneys general (§ 4c of the Clayton Act)
(a) Parens patriae; monetary relief; damages; prejudgment interest
(1) Any attorney general of a State may bring a civil action in the name of such State, as parens patriae on behalf of natural persons residing in such State, in any district court of the United States having jurisdiction of the defendant, to secure monetary relief as provided in this section for injury sustained by such natural persons to their property by reason of any violation of sections 1 to 7 of this title. …
(2) The court shall award the State as monetary relief threefold the total damage sustained as described in paragraph (1) of this subsection, and the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee. The court may award under this paragraph, pursuant to a motion by such State promptly made, simple interest on the total damage for the period beginning on the date of service of such State’s pleading setting forth a claim under the antitrust laws and ending on the date of judgment, or for any shorter period therein, if the court finds that the award of such interest for such period is just in the circumstances. In determining whether an award of interest under this paragraph for any period is just in the circumstances, the court shall consider only –
(A) whether such State or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, made motions or asserted claims or defenses so lacking in merit as to show that such party or representative acted intentionally for delay or otherwise acted in bad faith;
(B) whether, in the course of the action involved, such State or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, violated any applicable rule, statute, or court order providing for sanctions for dilatory behavior or other wise providing for expeditious proceedings; and
(C) whether such State or the opposing party, or either party’s representative, engaged in conduct primarily for the purpose of delaying the litigation or increasing the cost thereof.
 Sec. 15d. Measurement of damages (§ 4d of the Clayton Act)
In any action under section 15c(a)(1) of this title, in which there has been a determination that a defendant agreed to fix prices in violation of sections 1 to 7 of this title, damages may be proved and assessed in the aggregate by statistical or sampling methods, by the computation of illegal overcharges, or by such other reasonable system of estimating aggregate damages as the court in its discretion may permit without the necessity of separately proving the individual claim of, or amount of damage to, persons on whose behalf the suit was brought.
 Sec. 17. Antitrust laws not applicable to labor organizations (§ 6 of the Clayton Act)
The labor of a human being is not a commodity or article of commerce. Nothing contained in the antitrust laws shall be construed to forbid the existence and operation of labor, agricultural, or horticultural organizations, instituted for the purposes of mutual help, and not having capital stock or conducted for profit, or to forbid or restrain individual members of such organizations from lawfully carrying out the legitimate objects thereof; nor shall such organizations, or the members thereof, be held or construed to be illegal combinations or conspiracies in restraint of trade, under the antitrust laws.
 Sec. 18. Acquisition by one corporation of stock of another (§ 7 of the Clayton Act)
No person engaged in commerce or in any activity affecting commerce shall acquire, directly or indirectly, the whole or any part of the stock or other share capital and no person subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission shall acquire the whole or any part of the assets of another person engaged also in commerce or in any activity affecting commerce, where in any line of commerce or in any activity affecting commerce in any section of the country, the effect of such acquisition may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly.
No person shall acquire, directly or indirectly, the whole or any part of the stock or other share capital and no person subject to the jurisdiction of the Federal Trade Commission shall acquire the whole or any part of the assets of one or more persons engaged in commerce or in any activity affecting commerce, where in any line of commerce or in any activity affecting commerce in any section of the country, the effect of such acquisition, of such stocks or assets, or of the use of such stock by the voting or granting of proxies or otherwise, may be substantially to lessen competition, or to tend to create a monopoly.
This section shall not apply to persons purchasing such stock solely for investment and not using the same by voting or otherwise to bring about, or in attempting to bring about, the substantial lessening of competition. Nor shall anything contained in this section prevent a corporation engaged in commerce or in any activity affecting commerce from causing the formation of subsidiary corporations for the actual carrying on of their immediate lawful business, or the natural and legitimate branches or extensions thereof, or from owning and holding all or a part of the stock of such subsidiary corporations, when the effect of such formation is not to substantially lessen competition.
Nor shall anything herein contained be construed to prohibit any common carrier subject to the laws to regulate commerce from aiding in the construction of branches or short lines so located as to become feeders to the main line of the company so aiding in such construction or from acquiring or owning all or any part of the stock of such branch lines, nor to prevent any such common carrier from acquiring and owning all or any part of the stock of a branch or short line constructed by an independent company where there is no substantial competition between the company owning the branch line so constructed and the company owning the main line acquiring the property or an interest therein, nor to prevent such common carrier from extending any of its lines through the medium of the acquisition of stock or otherwise of any other common carrier where there is no substantial competition between the company extending its lines and the company whose stock, property, or an interest therein is so acquired.
 Sec. 25. Restraining violations; procedure (§ 15 of the Clayton Act)
The several district courts of the United States are invested with jurisdiction to prevent and restrain violations of this Act, and it shall be the duty of the several United States attorneys, in their respective districts, under the direction of the Attorney General, to institute proceedings in equity to prevent and restrain such violations. Such proceedings may be by way of petition setting forth the case and praying that such violation shall be enjoined or otherwise prohibited. When the parties complained of shall have been duly notified of such petition, the court shall proceed, as soon as may be, to the hearing and determination of the case; and pending such petition, and before final decree, the court may at any time make such temporary restraining order or prohibition as shall be deemed just in the premises. Whenever it shall appear to the court before which any such proceeding may be pending that the ends of justice require that other parties should be brought before the court, the court may cause them to be summoned whether they reside in the district in which the court is held or not, and subpoenas to that end may be served in any district by the marshal thereof.
 Sec. 26. Injunctive relief for private parties; exception; costs (§ 16 of the Clayton Act)
Any person, firm, corporation, or association shall be entitled to sue for and have injunctive relief, in any court of the United States having jurisdiction over the parties, against threatened loss or damage by a violation of the antitrust laws, including sections 13, 14, 18, and 19 of this title, when and under the same conditions and principles as injunctive relief against threatened conduct that will cause loss or damage is granted by courts of equity, under the rules governing such proceedings, and upon the execution of proper bond against damages for an injunction improvidently granted and a showing that the danger of irreparable loss or damage is immediate, a preliminary injunction may issue: Provided, That nothing herein contained shall be construed to entitle any person, firm, corporation, or association, except the United States, to bring suit in equity for injunctive relief against any common carrier subject to the provisions of subtitle IV of title 49, in respect of any matter subject to the regulation, supervision, or other jurisdiction of the Interstate Commerce Commission. In any action under this section in which the plaintiff substantially prevails, the court shall award the cost of suit, including a reasonable attorney’s fee, to such plaintiff.

Attorneys, Get Listed

X