Sec. 2. Sherman Act amendments
294 words·~1 min read·
/bill/117/s/1074/is/section-2A research copy — for the controlling text, always check the official state or federal source. Not legal advice.
The Sherman Act ( 15 U.S.C. 1 et seq.) is amended— in section 2 ( 15 U.S.C. 2 )— by striking Every and inserting
(a)Every ; and by adding at the end the following: In any case alleging a violation of this section or section 1 in which a plaintiff establishes by a preponderance of the evidence (including direct evidence) the existence of substantial market power or the anticompetitive or otherwise detrimental effects of particular practices, a plaintiff need neither define the scope of a relevant market nor establish the share of such a market controlled by the defendant. In any case alleging a violation of this section or section 1 in which the defendant relies on alleged procompetitive effects to justify the conduct of the defendant, the defendant shall establish by clear and convincing evidence that— the procompetitive effects of the conduct clearly outweigh the anticompetitive effects of the conduct; and the defendant could not obtain substantially similar procompetitive effects through commercially reasonable alternatives that would involve materially lower competitive risks. ; and in section 4 ( 15 U.S.C. 4 )— by striking The several and inserting
(a)The several ; and by adding at the end the following: In any action brought by the United States or the Federal Trade Commission alleging a violation of this Act, if the United States or the Federal Trade Commission establishes such a violation, the court shall order disgorgement of all profits earned by the defendant as a result of the conduct constituting that violation, except upon a showing of extraordinary good cause. It is the policy of the United States that the principal standard for evaluating the permissibility of practices under this Act is the protection of economic competition within the United States. .