Read case problem 16.2 of attachment. Essay question: In the context of this case, assess whether a pattern of exclusive distributorship in a market violates the Sherman Act?
The two largest newspapers in Chicago are the Chicago Tribune and the Sun Times, and the two largest supplemental news providers are the New York Times News supplemental Service the Tribune has a the Los Angeles Times/Washington News Service. In addition to printing the work of its owe staff, the tribune has a contract with the New York Ti basis inerthinatenal of ocher Pursuant to which the Service provides news and interest w the Tribune on an exclusive b area. The Sun Times has a similar exclusive arrsaeen:ghe. micagenot with the Los Angeles Times/Washington News Service. As a result of these exclusive contracts, Chicago’s third largest newspaper, the Daily Herald, could not obtain newsfeed from either service. It was also unable to obtain newsfeed from the third most popular provider because that provider was owned by the Tribune, which refused to license its stories to a competitor in its home market. The Daily Herald challenged this pattern of exclusive distributorships as a violation of section 1 of the Sherman Act, claiming that it effectively denied the Herald the opportunity to subscribe to the best supplemental news services. Does a pattern of exclusive distributorships in a market violate the Sherman Act? In what way could the news services’ practices harm consumers? Wat ifTribune the Hera and ld could show that it had tried to outbid h the a the Sun Times for their supplemental news service sub.- scriptions? Would the Herald’s argument be strongerf if the exclusive agreements were long-term agreeme 1 Win/4 Publications, ‘ lieduons, Inc. v. Chicago Tribune Co., 103