{"id":32549,"date":"2023-03-25T16:53:15","date_gmt":"2023-03-25T16:53:15","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/?page_id=32549"},"modified":"2025-03-29T02:08:51","modified_gmt":"2025-03-29T09:08:51","slug":"unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act","status":"publish","type":"page","link":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/","title":{"rendered":"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act"},"content":{"rendered":"

[et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ custom_padding_last_edited=”on|desktop” admin_label=”Inner Top Banner and Title Section” module_class=”inner-banner-sec” _builder_version=”4.27.0″ background_image=”https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2022\/02\/court-header-2.jpg” custom_padding=”120px||20px||false|false” custom_padding_tablet=”80px||20px||false|false” custom_padding_phone=”50px||||false|false” background_last_edited=”on|phone” locked=”off” collapsed=”off” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row module_class=”pstatic” _builder_version=”4.16″ custom_padding=”||||false|false” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ module_class=”pstatic” _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Title” module_class=”leftborder” _builder_version=”4.27.4″ text_font=”|900|||||||” text_text_color=”#ffffff” header_font=”|700||on|||||” header_text_align=”left” header_text_color=”#303030″ header_font_size=”40px” header_line_height=”1.3em” header_2_font=”|700|||||||” header_2_text_align=”left” header_2_text_color=”#ffffff” header_2_font_size=”27px” header_2_line_height=”1.25em” header_3_font=”|700|||||||” header_3_text_color=”#ffffff” header_3_font_size=”27px” header_3_line_height=”1.2em” max_width=”700px” module_alignment=”left” custom_padding=”||||false|false” custom_padding_tablet=”” custom_padding_phone=”||||false|false” custom_padding_last_edited=”on|phone” hover_enabled=”0″ text_font_size_tablet=”” text_font_size_phone=”20px” text_font_size_last_edited=”on|phone” header_text_align_tablet=”left” header_text_align_phone=”left” header_text_align_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_font_size_tablet=”36px” header_font_size_phone=”30px” header_font_size_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_line_height_tablet=”1.3em” header_line_height_phone=”1.3em” header_line_height_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_2_text_align_tablet=”left” header_2_text_align_phone=”left” header_2_text_align_last_edited=”on|phone” header_2_font_size_tablet=”32px” header_2_font_size_phone=”24px” header_2_font_size_last_edited=”on|phone” header_3_font_size_tablet=”27px” header_3_font_size_phone=”21px” header_3_font_size_last_edited=”on|phone” text_orientation_tablet=”” text_orientation_phone=”” text_orientation_last_edited=”on|phone” header_2_text_shadow_style=”preset1″ header_2_text_shadow_horizontal_length=”2px” header_2_text_shadow_vertical_length=”2px” header_2_text_shadow_blur_strength=”2px” header_2_text_shadow_color=”#303030″ global_colors_info=”{}” custom_css_main_element_last_edited=”on|desktop” sticky_enabled=”0″]<\/p>\n

Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act<\/h1>\n

[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section][et_pb_section fb_built=”1″ admin_label=”Main Content Section” module_class=”inner-content-sec” _builder_version=”4.27.0″ locked=”off” collapsed=”on” global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_row _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_column type=”4_4″ _builder_version=”4.16″ global_colors_info=”{}”][et_pb_text admin_label=”Main Text” _builder_version=”4.27.0″ text_font=”||||||||” text_text_color=”#000000″ header_font=”|900|||||||” header_font_size=”48px” header_2_font=”|700||on|||||” header_2_text_align=”left” header_2_text_color=”#000000″ header_2_line_height=”1.2em” text_line_height_tablet=”” text_line_height_phone=”” text_line_height_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_font_size_tablet=”36px” header_font_size_phone=”27px” header_font_size_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_2_text_align_tablet=”left” header_2_text_align_phone=”” header_2_text_align_last_edited=”on|desktop” header_2_font_size_tablet=”” header_2_font_size_phone=”27px” header_2_font_size_last_edited=”on|desktop” global_colors_info=”{}”]<\/p>\n

We have extensive experience litigating and advising clients about claims made under Section 3 of the Clayton Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 14, and which forbids certain kinds of exclusive-dealing and tying arrangements: namely, those that meet the following two criteria: (1) the arrangement is used in a contract or transaction for the sale or lease of a commodity in interstate commerce; and (2) the arrangement substantially lessens competition in a properly defined relevant market \u2014 typically by foreclosing such a high percentage of overall sales as to deprive competitors an opportunity to establish a foothold in the market and impose viable competitive pressure on the defendant.<\/p>\n

Historically, Section 3 of the Clayton Act reaches only exclusive dealing or tying used in the interstate sale of commodities, while Section 1 of the Sherman Act reaches these same practices when used in the provision of services in interstate commerce. The distinction matters: at least arguably, Section 3 still permits a plaintiff to seek an antitrust injunction upon a showing of a substantial likelihood of a violation. Section 1 requires a plaintiff to prove its antitrust injury caused by harm to competition in a properly defined relevant market under the modern consumer-welfare standard<\/a>.<\/p>\n

[\/et_pb_text][\/et_pb_column][\/et_pb_row][\/et_pb_section]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton ActWe have extensive experience litigating and advising clients about claims made under Section 3 of the Clayton Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 14, and which forbids certain kinds of exclusive-dealing and tying arrangements: namely, those that meet the following two criteria: […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"parent":26545,"menu_order":0,"comment_status":"closed","ping_status":"closed","template":"","meta":{"_et_pb_use_builder":"on","_et_pb_old_content":"

We have extensive experience litigating and advising clients about claims made under Section 3 of the Clayton Act, which is codified at 15 U.S.C. \u00a7 14, and which forbids certain kinds of exclusive-dealing and tying arrangements: namely, those that meet the following two criteria: (1) the arrangement is used in a contract or transaction for the sale or lease of a commodity in interstate commerce; and (2) the arrangement substantially lessens competition in a properly defined relevant market \u2014 typically by foreclosing such a high percentage of overall sales as to deprive competitors an opportunity to establish a foothold in the market and impose viable competitive pressure on the defendant.<\/p>

Historically, Section 3 of the Clayton Act reaches only exclusive dealing or tying used in the interstate sale of commodities, while Section 1 of the Sherman Act reaches these same practices when used in the provision of services in interstate commerce. The distinction matters: at least arguably, Section 3 still permits a plaintiff to seek an antitrust injunction upon a showing of a substantial likelihood of a violation. Section 1 requires a plaintiff to prove its antitrust injury caused by harm to competition in a properly defined relevant market under the modern consumer-welfare standard<\/strong>.<\/p>","_et_gb_content_width":"","footnotes":""},"class_list":["post-32549","page","type-page","status-publish","hentry"],"yoast_head":"\nUnlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act - LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"Harvard-trained attorney William Markham litigates claims for unlawful exclusive-dealing and unlawful tying that arise under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and California's Cartwright Act.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"noindex, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"Harvard-trained attorney William Markham litigates claims for unlawful exclusive-dealing and unlawful tying that arise under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and California's Cartwright Act.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:publisher\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawOfficesofWilliamMarkhamPC\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2025-03-29T09:08:51+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/sandiego-harbor-2.webp\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"1917\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"1074\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/webp\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"1 minute\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\/\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/\",\"name\":\"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act - LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#website\"},\"datePublished\":\"2023-03-25T16:53:15+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2025-03-29T09:08:51+00:00\",\"description\":\"Harvard-trained attorney William Markham litigates claims for unlawful exclusive-dealing and unlawful tying that arise under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and California's Cartwright Act.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Practice Areas\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":3,\"name\":\"Antitrust Litigation and Counseling\",\"item\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":4,\"name\":\"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/\",\"name\":\"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.\",\"description\":\"Trial and Appellate Attorneys in San Diego\",\"publisher\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#organization\"},\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en\"},{\"@type\":\"Organization\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#organization\",\"name\":\"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/\",\"logo\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en\",\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\",\"url\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/sandiego-harbor-2.webp\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/sandiego-harbor-2.webp\",\"width\":1917,\"height\":1074,\"caption\":\"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/\"},\"sameAs\":[\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawOfficesofWilliamMarkhamPC\/\"]}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO Premium plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act - LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.","description":"Harvard-trained attorney William Markham litigates claims for unlawful exclusive-dealing and unlawful tying that arise under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and California's Cartwright Act.","robots":{"index":"noindex","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act","og_description":"Harvard-trained attorney William Markham litigates claims for unlawful exclusive-dealing and unlawful tying that arise under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and California's Cartwright Act.","og_url":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/","og_site_name":"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.","article_publisher":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawOfficesofWilliamMarkhamPC\/","article_modified_time":"2025-03-29T09:08:51+00:00","og_image":[{"width":1917,"height":1074,"url":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/sandiego-harbor-2.webp","type":"image\/webp"}],"twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_misc":{"Est. reading time":"1 minute"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/","url":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/","name":"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act - LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#website"},"datePublished":"2023-03-25T16:53:15+00:00","dateModified":"2025-03-29T09:08:51+00:00","description":"Harvard-trained attorney William Markham litigates claims for unlawful exclusive-dealing and unlawful tying that arise under Section 1 of the Sherman Act, Section 3 of the Clayton Act, and California's Cartwright Act.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/"]}]},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/unlawful-exclusive-dealing-or-tying-under-section-3-of-the-clayton-act\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Practice Areas","item":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":3,"name":"Antitrust Litigation and Counseling","item":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/practice-areas\/antitrust-law\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":4,"name":"Unlawful Exclusive Dealing or Tying under Section 3 of the Clayton Act"}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#website","url":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/","name":"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.","description":"Trial and Appellate Attorneys in San Diego","publisher":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#organization"},"potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en"},{"@type":"Organization","@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#organization","name":"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C.","url":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/","logo":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en","@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/","url":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/sandiego-harbor-2.webp","contentUrl":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-content\/uploads\/2023\/01\/sandiego-harbor-2.webp","width":1917,"height":1074,"caption":"LAW OFFICES OF WILLIAM MARKHAM, P.C."},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/#\/schema\/logo\/image\/"},"sameAs":["https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/LawOfficesofWilliamMarkhamPC\/"]}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/32549","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/page"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=32549"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/32549\/revisions"}],"up":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/pages\/26545"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/www.markhamlawfirm.com\/mystaging\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=32549"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}