Antitrust and Related Websites by Carl E. Person

The websites by Carl E. Person of greatest interest to anyone interested in enforcement of the nation's antitrust laws should be:

(i) Attorney Person's website on the Robinson-Patman Act, a federal statute prohibiting price discrimination in the form of discriminatory rebates or other discriminatory payments or benefits to major retailer chains, with resulting higher prices to smaller competitors. This website is primarily devoted to Section 2(a)/2(f) price discrimination lawsuits and related 2(f) claims against competitors (usually commenced by direct purchasers), with little attention given to Section 2(d)/2(e) claims (of greater interest to indirect purchasers), because the 2(d)/2(e) claims are automatically added to a 2(a)/2(f) complaint to ensure that whatever discrimination that exists is covered by either 2(a) (price discrimination) or 2(d)/2(e) (advertising and promotional program discrimation).See Robinson-Patman Act / Price Discrimination Website

(ii) Another Robinson-Patman Act website by Carl E. Person focuses on the price discrimination claims available to jobbers and retailers who do not purchase directly from the manufacturer. They can assert claims against a manufacturer who fails to provide comparable advertising and promotional money and programs that the manufacturer makes available to competing major retailers. Also, the indirect purchaser may have a claim for injunctive relief against the competitors as well as the manufacturer. See Website for RPA Claims of the Indirect Purchaser

(iii) Another antitrust website, far less developed than the RPA websites, is Person's website for the Sherman Antitrust Act. The Sherman Act over past years has become less enforceable than the RPA. The Sherman Act prohibits contracts, combinations and conspiracies in retraint of trade, predatory practices by a monopolist, monopolization by an illegally-acquired monopoly, and attempted monopolization under various circumstances. The unfortunable thing is that the federal courts (which has exclusive jurisdiction over antitrust cases) have generally been reluctant to hold that conduct is illegal under the Sherman Act. Because of this reluctance, many prospective plaintiffs and their lawyers feel that an antitrust suit under the Sherman Act would be a waste of time, statistically, with the result that there are far fewer lawsuits brought today under the Sherman Act than 25-40 years ago.

(iv) The U.S. and state governments, during the past 25 years or more, have been withdrawing from any meaningful enforcement of the nation's antitrust laws. This has placed the burden on private plaintiffs and their counsel (such as Carl E. Person). The problem with this, however, is that private plaintiffs and their counsel don't have the money to go all the way against a major corporation whose very existence may well depend on continued violation of the antitrust laws. The major corporation is prepared to spare no expense (and is willing to spend hundreds of millions of dollars, if necessary) to defend their illegal conduct and prevent a court from entering injunctive relief. After fighting a private antitrust lawsuit for a few years, the major corporation (if it hasn't been able to have the case thrown out by the time of trial) will ordinarily make an offer to the plaintiff which the plaintiff cannot refuse - an offer which ordinarily is less than interest on the amount of damages suffered by the plaintiff. The plaintiff and its lawyer have no recourse but to settle, quite often, and all other businesses being hurt by the practice in question will continue to be hurt because the private litigant does not obtain any injunctive relief at all, and the money obtained in settlement goes only to the plaintiff, and not to the tens of thousands of other businesses being hurt by the practice in question. Person's solution to this problem is to have a "town attorney general" elected or appointed in every town, village, city and county in the United States - perhaps a total of 20,000 "town attorneys general", to enforce the nation's antitrust laws (and other laws protecting voters, residents, employees, homeowners and small businesses) AT GOVERNMENTAL EXPENSE! A major corporation violating the antitrust laws has to provide some campaign financing to a very limited number of state attorneys general and to both presidential candidates to feel secure that no governmental body is going to bring an antitrust suit against the major corporation. But if there is a decentralization of the office of the state attorney general, through the creation of 20,000 "town attorneys general", it would be impossible to bribe all 20,000, and a corporation violating the antitrust laws could expect tens, hundreds or even thousands of lawsuits against it if it failed to abide by the nation's antitrust laws (and other laws protecting individuals as distinguished from corporations). Major corporations are illegally taking away the jobs, property values, and standard of living from residents, and are illegally putting local small businesses out of business. This could be stopped by an army of town attorneys general. See Town Attorney General Website

(v) Attorney Person's website on his current auto-parts price-discrimination litigation against AutoZone, Advance Auto, Wal-Mart, Sam's Club and various auto-parts manufacturers, at Website for Current Auto-Parts Lawsuit

(vi) Attorney Person's website about Wal-Mart, at Website about the Wal-Mart Problem

(vii) Attorney Person's 41-issue website in support of his Green Party (and then independent) candidacy for election in 2006 as New York Attorney General. The candidacy fizzled for a variety of reasons, with Person unable to get on the ballot. See Carl Person for New York Attorney General - 2006.

(viii) Starting in 2007, I (Carl E. Person) have been working on a NYC ballot initiative to create the first city attorney general in the United States, the office of the New York City Attorney General, which petition also names me as the NYC Attorney General. The required number of signatures have to be obtained before voters get a chance to vote for or against the petition. All this is explained in the petition. See Petition to Create Office of the NYC Attorney General. The NYC Attorney General can raise billions of dollars annually for NYC by suing major corporations for violations of law. Eliot Spitzer, before becoming Governor of New York in 2007, was the NYS Attorney General and in 2004 he raised about $2.3 billion through settlement of lawsuits he brought against financial companies. His successor, Andrew Cuomo, nearing the end of 2007, has been doing the same thing, with some notable successes. These attorney general type lawsuits should also be commenced at the local level of government, where the injuries take place, where the evidence exists, and where it would be easier for an injured businessperson or consumer to be able to convince the local attorney general to sue.

Website about the Wal-Mart Problem

(ix) Attorney Person's American Jobs Party website seeking to find and communicate with Americans wanting to save American jobs, fight the "Evil Economic Trio of Outsourcing, Globalization and Declining Standard of Living", and fight (at the grass-roots level of government) for the economic, social and other rights of individuals and small businesses against overreaching by major corporations and their enablers. See American Jobs Party Website for Individuals and Small Businesses.

(x) Attorney Person's website with 16 campaign issues for local elections in the nation's 18,500 towns and villages, with Person offering himself as "default candidate" in absence of any other candidate supporting such issues. See Small-Business and Job-Oriented Platform for Local Elections.

(xi> A major development for greater antitrust law enforcement, I hope, is the creation of my new website, which is designed to provide more income to anyone in the United States seeking more income, with the website user giving permission for the website to send the user a weekly newsletter. This newsletter will provide its subscription base with information not available through the main media. For example, most Americans believe (from the major media) that when the economy goes up that it benefits most people in the United States. But this is not true. The way that the major media define "goes up" only applies to the rich. In fact, as the market goes up and the rich get richer, the middle class and poor see more jobs going overseas, and a reduction of opportunities in the United States. What is good for General Motors is no longer good for most voters and other individuals in the United States. Take a look at this website and see my explanation in another top banner option. Also, see - a FREE Website Enabling Americans to Remake Themselves Financially.