The US Supreme Court increases the risk that online marketplaces with exclusive rights to third-party products will not have a defense under the “indirect purchaser” doctrine (Apple / Pepper)

On May 13, 2019, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a major antitrust decision in Apple v. Pepper, which could have far-reaching implications for retailers and platforms accused of monopolistic conduct. For example, the case increases the risk that any online marketplace with exclusive rights to carry products made and owned by others will not have a defense under the Illinois Brick “indirect purchaser” doctrine—particularly where the marketplace collects payment from buyers and then charges the product owners a fee or commission. The risks are even higher if the marketplace is alleged to have high market share or monopoly power. The plaintiffs in Apple are iPhone owners who purchased, through Apple’s App Store, iPhone applications (“apps”) made by third-party developers. The plaintiffs allege

L'accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés

Déjà abonné ? Identifiez-vous

L’accès à cet article est réservé aux abonnés.

Lire gratuitement un article

Vous pouvez lire cet article gratuitement en vous inscrivant.

 

Version PDF

Auteurs

  • Baker Botts (San Francisco)
  • Baker Botts (Washington)
  • Baker Botts (Washington)
  • Baker Botts (Washington)

Citation

Peter Huston, Joseph Ostoyich, Scott Keller, Christopher Wilson, The US Supreme Court increases the risk that online marketplaces with exclusive rights to third-party products will not have a defense under the “indirect purchaser” doctrine (Apple / Pepper), 13 mai 2019, e-Competitions May 2019, Art. N° 94817

Visites 50

Tous les numéros

  • Latest News issue 
  • Tous les News issues
  • Latest Special issue 
  • Tous les Special issues