Competition

[mikescomics]

I'm about to write something that's probably more editorial than usual, and not intended to be a short sound byte, so, be warned. But, if you're interested in the business of business, and how it is impacting us all, it's an important read

Comments

[millysdaughter]

Trying to skirt around the anti-trust clause will come back to bite them in the end. While my degree is in econ, not law, I can smell a rat when it pops up its beady-eyed little head and twitches its whiskers.

[mikescomics]

There's a lot we're not saying here. There's more than one supplier doing this, there are more similar issues than this single one, it's been going on a long time...it's just getting worse again suddenly

*APPLAUDS*

[ellakite]

While I am no legal expert either, this definitely sounds like "restraint of trade" to me.

The only possible legal/rational defense I can think of for this supplier's new policy is if the venue in question explicitly forbids the specific sort of material that this supplier provides, and the supplier wants to avoid getting dragged into any future legal action that would ensue from someone advertising their product(s) in the venue in question. However, what little you've said on the matter causes me to infer that the venue in question does not have any such restriction against the material this supplier provides...

Re: *APPLAUDS*

[mikescomics]

I'm not venturing into legal opinion here. Just offering facts that concern me. In the fullness of discussion, if I gave more details, they'd seem leading, and an argument might be made it was misuse of context, even if I thought those other details were just a part of more robust disclosure