Yahoo Search Busca da Web

Resultado da Busca

  1. Há 4 dias · The first of these major measures declared illegal all combinations that restrained trade between states or with foreign nations. This law, known as the Sherman Antitrust Act (taking its name from its author, John Sherman) was passed by Congress early in July.

  2. Há 4 dias · The meaning of SHERMAN ANTITRUST ACT is curbed concentrations of power that interfere with trade and reduce competition. One of its main provisions outlawed all combinations that restrained trade between states or with foreign nations.

  3. Há 4 dias · In 1902 he resurrected the nearly defunct Sherman Antitrust Act by bringing a lawsuit that led to the breakup of a huge railroad conglomerate, the Northern Securities Company. Roosevelt pursued this policy of “trust-busting” by initiating suits against 43 other major corporations during the next seven years.

  4. Há 1 dia · The Sherman Act: Enacted in 1890, the Sherman Act is a fundamental antitrust law in the United States that prohibits monopolistic practices and anti-competitive agreements. It targets all contracts, combinations and conspiracies that restrain interstate and international trade, aiming to ensure a competitive market environment.

  5. Há 4 dias · In his first significant movement toward Roosevelt’s New Nationalism, Wilson reversed his position that merely strengthening the Sherman Antitrust Act would suffice to prevent monopoly. Instead, he took up and pushed through Congress the Progressive-sponsored Federal Trade Commission Act of 1914.

    • sherman antitrust act1
    • sherman antitrust act2
    • sherman antitrust act3
    • sherman antitrust act4
    • sherman antitrust act5
  6. Há 1 dia · US President Benjamin Harrison signed the landmark Sherman Antitrust Act into law on July 2, 1890. The law changed the landscape of American industry as it prohibited the establishment of trusts (agreements to restrict trade among the several states) and monopolies.

  7. Há 4 dias · The Commission historically has challenged conduct that it alleges violates the Sherman Act, Clayton Act, or Robinson-Patman Act pursuant to its Section 5 authority. In addition, the Supreme Court has recognized that the scope of Section 5 potentially reaches beyond violations of the federal antitrust statutes to include broader categories of conduct.