Open Access. Powered by Scholars. Published by Universities.®
- Keyword
Articles 1 - 3 of 3
Full-Text Articles in Law
The Morality Of Monopolization Law, Sandeep Vaheesan
The Morality Of Monopolization Law, Sandeep Vaheesan
William & Mary Law Review Online
Congress enacted the Sherman Act in 1890 and prohibited, among other practices, monopolization. To prove monopolization, the government and other plaintiffs must show that a firm both possessed monopoly power and engaged in bad conduct. In interpreting the spare language of the statute, the courts have identified many practices that constitute monopolization, including below-cost pricing, refusals to deal with rivals, and tying. In general, however, they have failed to explain why these practices are unfair and restricted by law. Judges have instead applied labels such as "anticompetitive" without articulating normative foundations for their decisions. A close examination of the case …
Brick By Brick: Deconstructing Pyramid-Like Companies By Requiring Disclosures From Multilevel Marketing Schemes, Alex Chumbley
Brick By Brick: Deconstructing Pyramid-Like Companies By Requiring Disclosures From Multilevel Marketing Schemes, Alex Chumbley
William & Mary Business Law Review
Multilevel marketing companies ("MLMs") have thrived in the internet era as participants are able to market their products to their friends and followers on social media sites. Further, periods of high unemployment, such as during the COVID-19 pandemic, have led to increased enrollment in these companies. However, very few people actually make any money from selling for these companies. Beyond that, almost half of those who participate lose money due to the enrollment costs. This Note examines past case law surrounding MLMs and critiques the current regulations in place that fail to ensure that new participants are making a fully …
Rules Of Regularity: An Empirical Quest For Commercial Certainty In Arbitration, Cornelis J.W. Baaij
Rules Of Regularity: An Empirical Quest For Commercial Certainty In Arbitration, Cornelis J.W. Baaij
William & Mary Business Law Review
The U.S. Supreme Court justifies the broad enforceability of arbitration agreements with the notion that arbitration expands parties' autonomy to contract for an efficient alternative to court proceedings. Unfortunately, the current practice of both domestic and cross-border commercial arbitration does not fully live up to these expectations. It is crucial to both autonomy and efficiency theories of contract law that adjudicatory decision-making is predictable so parties can tailor their contracts accordingly. However, commercial arbitration's prevailing culture of confidentiality and lack of stare decisis diminishes commercial certainty. To bring the reality of commercial arbitration closer to the Supreme Court's reasoning, this …