Section 1 of the Sherman Act
From the case, Marucci had the right to file a lawsuit against NFHS and NCAA. The standard provided by NCAA and NFHS were not in good faith since they violated the Sherman Act. Section one of the act indicates that contract that restraint commerce is illegal. Section one prohibits agreement that causes bid-rigging, price-fixing, and refusal to deal, among others. The parties agreeing or affected by the agreement may be customers, competitors, or both. The standard set by the NCAA and NFHS affected both the competitors and the customers. Muracci reported decreased sales of four products. The composite bats represented wood bats, making it hard for the Muracci to sell all the eleven products as they were decertified for use in collegiate and high school games (Ward 16). The change made by NCAA and NFHS violated section one of the Sherman Act.
The standards provided by NFHS and NCAA restrained the trade of games products centrally to the Sherman Act. The court uses two approaches of section one to pass out judgment. First, the approach includes bid-rigging and price-fixing activities. Secondly, the approach considers the reason why an individual or organization took certain action. In the case, it is clear that NFHS and NCAA action had a negative economic effect on Muracci since four of the products were not selling. In consideration of the first approach of section one, the standards put across by NCAA and NFHS indirectly favored some producers in the market (McNeese 39). Muracci had enough evidence to prove that NFHS and NCAA standards violated the Sherman Act.
McNeese, Tim. The Robber Barons and the Sherman Antitrust Act. New York, N.Y.: Chelsea House, 2012. Print.
Ward, Peter C. Federal Trade Commission: Law, Practice, and Procedure. New York, NY: Law Journal Seminars-Press, 2019. Print.