The US Supreme Court rejects the price squeeze theory, noting that the upstream and downstream claims should be considered separately (Pacific Bell / linkLine)

Introduction In Pac. Bell Tel. Co. v. linkLine Commc'ns, Inc. the U.S. Supreme Court considered whether a vertically integrated firm with market power in a wholesale market that competes with its customer downstream in a retail market was prohibited under Section 2 of the Sherman Act [1] from adopting a “price squeeze”. A defendant engaged in a price squeeze simultaneously raises its wholesale prices to its competitors while lowering its downstream retail prices, thereby making it more difficult for its competitors, who are reliant on it as a supplier, to compete against it in the downstream market. In a decision that reinforces the Court's intent to narrow Section 2, the Court rejected the price squeeze theory, noting that the upstream and downstream claims should be considered