Original sentence: , 380 U.145 (1968), was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which reaffirmed the law (as it then was) that fixing a maximum price wad illegal per se.Albrecht drew heavy criticism by economists who asserted that maximum price fixing actually increases consumer welfare, which they considered to be a primary goal of antitrust.Khan, which held that maximum price-setting was not inherently anti-competitive and not a violation of antitrust law.This rule was reversed in 1997 by State Oil Co
Edited sentence: , , was a decision by the United States Supreme Court, which held that wholesalers could not require franchisees and retailers of their products to sell items at a certain price; advertisements regarding sales, therefore, always included the language "Available at participating retailers only".Albrecht drew heavy criticism by economists, because vertical price fixing, particularly in the newspaper industry, actually increases consumer welfare, which is considered to be a primary goal of antitrust.Khan, which held that such price-setting was not inherently anti-competitive and not a violation of antitrust law.This broad rule was reversed in 1997 by State Oil Co