Document Type

Article

Comments

Resale Price Maintenance and Consumer Welfare, 77 Yale Law Journal 950 (1968)

Abstract

The basic issue in this exchange is whether Professors Gould and Yamey have materially weakened the case I made for the legality of resale price maintenance (r.p.m.) desired by a manufacturer who is not in collusion with other manufacturers. I believe they have not. In this response I will try to demonstrate that their Rejoinder's strictures on welfare economics are irrelevant, its price theory mistaken, and its demands for certainty one-sided and unreasonable.

Date of Authorship for this Version

1968

Included in

Law Commons

Share

COinS