Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. Sesac

8 Citing cases

  1. George R. Whitten, Jr., v. Paddock Pool Bldrs.

    508 F.2d 547 (1st Cir. 1974)   Cited 125 times
    Affirming summary-judgment because of lack of โ€œevidence that pipeless systems cater to a discrete class of consumersโ€

    In short, there is no evidence that pipeless systems cater to a discrete class of consumers. Examples are central station protective services specially accredited by insurance companies in Grinnell; men's, women's, and children's shoes attracting separate groups of customers in Brown Shoe, supra, 370 U.S. at 593-595, 82 S.Ct. 1502; and gospel music devotees in Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. SESAC, Inc., 268 F.2d 13, 15 (2d Cir), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 831, 80 S.Ct. 82, 4 L.Ed.2d 74 (1959). Whitten invokes a Scan (a McGraw-Hill microfilm service) survey, which found that only 54 of 399 pool projects specifying pipeless systems also specified conventional systems as an alternative, to support the assertion that many architects will accept no alternative to a pipeless system.

  2. Page v. Work

    290 F.2d 323 (9th Cir. 1961)   Cited 79 times
    Affirming grant of summary judgment to defendants in an antitrust case

    In the antitrust field a relevant market may be narrower than the entire business operation of the business under scrutiny. Thus, the Supreme Court has confined the relevant market of products (flexible packaging materials) of a large enterprise, United States v. E.I. Du Pont De Nemours Co., 1956, 351 U.S. 377, 76 S.Ct. 994, 100 L.Ed. 1264. A relevant market has been defined as championship boxing matches, as distinguished from other boxing matches, International Boxing Club v. United States, 1958, 358 U.S. 242, 79 S.Ct. 245, 3 L.Ed.2d 270; gospel music as distinguished from other music, Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. Sesac, Inc., D.C., 160 F. Supp. 865, affirmed 2 Cir., 1958, 268 F.2d 13; newspaper advertising as distinguished from circulation, Times-Picayune Pub. Co. v. United States, 1953, 345 U.S. 594, 73 S.Ct. 872, 97 L.Ed. 1277. In United States v. Yellow Cab Co., 1947, 332 U.S. 218, 67 S.Ct. 1560, 91 L.Ed. 2010, the Supreme Court held that the Yellow Cab was engaged in interstate commerce in transporting passengers from one railroad station in Chicago to another because of the unique position of Chicago as a terminus for interstate travelers, but the Court also held that the transportation by Yellow Cab from homes in the Chicago area to the railroad station was not in interstate commerce, as the impact of this transportation on interstate commerce was too indirect and fortuitous.

  3. Meredith Corp. v. Sesac LLC

    1 F. Supp. 3d 180 (S.D.N.Y. 2014)   Cited 26 times   1 Legal Analyses
    Finding that โ€œverticalโ€ relationship between owners of music copyrights and entity granted right to license their work foreclosed per se liability, notwithstanding that the owners sometimes competed against the entity by licensing their work themselves

    The Second Circuit affirmed the dismissal. See 268 F.2d 13, cert. denied,361 U.S. 831, 80 S.Ct. 82, 4 L.Ed.2d 74 (1959). D. BMI v. CBS (1979) and CBS Remand (1980)

  4. Williams v. Kleaveland

    534 F. Supp. 912 (W.D. Mich. 1981)   Cited 8 times
    Holding that rules established by hospitals to regulate the conduct of doctors must be capable of objective application

    The test of "relevant market" for antitrust purposes is that of reasonable interchangeability, considering price, use, and qualities. Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. Sesac, Inc., 160 F. Supp. 865, aff'd 268 F.2d 13, cert. den. 361 U.S. 831, 80 S.Ct. 82, 4 L.Ed.2d 74 (1958). As the Robinson court explained, a properly defined product market includes all products โ€” both items that are presently available and those which may potentially become available โ€” that have a significant, positive cross-elasticity of demand.

  5. Mowery v. Standard Oil Co. of Ohio

    463 F. Supp. 762 (N.D. Ohio 1976)   Cited 18 times

    The controlling case law clearly indicates that control of less than 50 percent of the relevant market is by itself sufficient evidence that monopoly power does not exist. United States v. United Shoe Machinery Corp., 110 F. Supp. 295, 346 (D.Mass. 1953), aff'd per curiam, 347 U.S. 521, 74 S.Ct. 699, 98 L.Ed. 910 (1954); Hiland Dairy, Inc. v. Kroger Co., 402 F.2d 968 (8th Cir. 1968), cert. denied, 395 U.S. 961, 89 S.Ct. 2096, 23 L.Ed.2d 748 (1969). See also United States v. E.I. dupont de Nemours Co., 351 U.S. 377, 76 S.Ct. 994, 100 L.Ed. 1264 (1965); Sulmeyer v. Coca Cola Co., 515 F.2d 835 (5th Cir. 1975); Bendix Corp. v. Balax, Inc., 471 F.2d 149 (7th Cir. 1972); Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. Sesac, Inc., 160 F. Supp. 865 (S.D.N.Y. 1958), aff'd 268 F.2d 13 (2d Cir.), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 831, 80 S.Ct. 82, 4 L.Ed.2d 74 (1959); Jack Winters, Inc. v. Koratron Co., 375 F. Supp. 1 (N.D.Cal. 1974). The burden of proof as to the relevant market and the defendant's illegal domination of it rests fully on the plaintiff.

  6. San Francisco Seals, Ltd. v. National Hockey League

    379 F. Supp. 966 (C.D. Cal. 1974)   Cited 13 times
    In San Francisco Seals, Ltd. v. National Hockey League, 379 F. Supp. 966 (C.D.Cal. 1974), the court upheld the NHL's right to preclude the Seals' proposed move to Vancouver.

    Actually, plaintiff does not claim to have been injured by the monopolistic practices of the National Hockey League as such, but that the monopolistic protection which affiliation with the National Hockey League can afford is being denied it at Vancouver. As the Court said in Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. Sesac, Inc., 160 F. Supp. 865, 876 (S.D.N.Y. 1958), aff'd, 268 F.2d 13 (2d Cir. 1959), cert. denied, 361 U.S. 831, 80 S.Ct. 82, 4 L.Ed.2d 74 (1959), plaintiff "was not aimed at and it was not hit; it was not even in the target area." Accordingly, plaintiff does not have standing to bring this action.

  7. Gardner v. Awards Marketing Corp.

    55 F.R.D. 460 (D. Utah 1972)   Cited 9 times

    6 S.Ct. 1698, 16 L.Ed.2d 778 (1966); United States v. Continental Can Co., 378 U.S. 441, 84 S.Ct. 1738, 12 L.Ed.2d 953 (1964); United States v. First Nat. Bank & Trust Co. of Lexington, 376 U.S. 665, 84 S.Ct. 1033, 12 L.Ed.2d 1 (1964); International Boxing Club of New York, Inc. v. United States, 358 U.S. 242, 79 S.Ct. 245, 3 L.Ed.2d 270 (1959); United States v. E. I. Du Pont De Nemours & Co., 351 U.S. 377, 76 S.Ct. 994, 100 L.Ed. 1264 (1956); Union Carbide & Carbon Corp. v. Nisley, 300 F.2d 561 (10th Cir. 1961); American Crystal Sugar Co. v. Cuban-American Sugar Co., 259 F.2d 524 (2d Cir. 1958); Mercantile Nat. Bank of Chicago v. Quest, Inc., 303 F.Supp. 926 (N.D.Ind.1969); Gottesman v. General Motors Corp., 279 F.Supp. 361 (S.D.N.Y.1967); United States v. Chas. Pfizer & Co., 246 F.Supp. 464 (E.D.N.Y.1965); Reliable Volkswagen Sales & Service Co. v. World-Wide Auto. Corp., 34 F.R.D. 134 (D.N.J.1963); Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. Sesac, Inc., 160 F.Supp. 865 (S.D.N.Y.), aff'd 268 F.2d 13 (2d Cir.), cert. denied 361 U.S. 831, 80 S.Ct. 82, 4 L.Ed.2d 74 (1958); Beacon Fruit & Produce Co. v. H. Harris & Co., 152 F.Supp. 702 (D.Mass.1957). There seems to be no such parallel between trading stamps and the myriad self-help promotional devices often employed by retail petroleum outlets.

  8. Servisco v. Morreale

    312 F. Supp. 103 (E.D. La. 1970)   Cited 4 times

    The knowledge of which among these is a Protexacar customer is, under the circumstances, not a trade secret. See Edwin L. Wiegand Co. v. Harold E. Trent Co., 3 Cir. 1941, 122 F.2d 920, cert. denied, 316 U.S. 667, 62 S.Ct. 1033, 86 L.Ed. 1743; Affiliated Music Enterprises, Inc. v. Sesac, Inc., 2 Cir. 1959, 268 F.2d 13, cert. denied, 361 U.S. 831, 80 S.Ct. 82, 4 L.Ed.2d 74; Di Angeles v. Scauzillo, 1934, 287 Mass. 291, 191 N.E. 426; Scavengers' Protective Asso. v. Serv-U-Garbage Co., 1933, 218 Cal. 568, 24 P.2d 489; Town Country House Home Service, Inc. v. Newberry, 1958, 3 N.Y.2d 554, 170 N.Y.S.2d 328, 147 N.E.2d 724; Van Products Co. v. General Welding Fabricating Co., 1965, 419 Pa. 248, 213 A.2d 769, and other cases cited in Annotation, 28 A.L.R.3d 7, 42-45 (1969). See also Restatement of Agency 2d, ยง 393.