...themselves into two general classes. The first class consists of those competitive practices which are opposed to good morals because characterized by deception, bad faith, fraud or oppression ; the second class are those which are unfair from an economic standpoint and against public policy...

...to determine, as matter of law. what they include. They are clearly inapplicable to practices never heretofore regarded as opposed to good morals because...unduly to hinder competition or create monopoly. The act was certainly not intended to fetter free and fair competition as commonly understood and practised...

...ultimately to determine as matter of law what they include. They are clearly inapplicable to practices never heretofore regarded as opposed to good morals because...unduly to hinder competition or create monopoly. The act was certainly not intended to fetter free and fair competition as commonly understood and practiced...

...of unfair methods of competition, the court said: "They are clearly inapplicable to practices never heretofore regarded as opposed to good morals because...unduly to hinder competition or create monopoly." Federal Trade Commission v. Gratz, 253 US 421. Included in those methods of competition regarded as...

...pleader's conclusion. The acts complained of in this case arc not those which have heretofore been regarded as "opposed to good morals because characterized...dangerous tendency unduly to hinder competition or croatc monopoly." And as said in the Gratz case: "If real competition is to continue the right of the...

...case: "The word? 'unfair methods of competition' * * * are clearly inapplicable to practices never heretofore regarded as opposed to good morals because...by deception, bad faith, fraud, or oppression, or a« against public policy because of their dangerou« tendency unduly to hinder competition or create...

...the prohibition against the use of unfair methods of competition extends to all practices contrary to public policy " because of their dangerous tendency unduly to hinder competition or create a monopoly." In these two decisions, and in Federal Trade Commission v. Winsted Hosiery Co., 258 US...

...answered, no. And we can find no sufficient reason for a contrary conclusion. Certainly the practice is not opposed to good morals because characterized by deception, bad faith, fraud or oppression. Federal Trade Commission v. Gratz, 253 US 421, 427. It has been openly adopted by many competing concerns....

...the Court said that the words "unfair method of competition" clearly did not apply to practices never heretofore regarded as opposed to good morals because...tendency unduly to hinder competition or create monopoly. This was a negative description. offend in the way above described it was an unfair method of competition....

...the Court said that the words "unfair method of competition" clearly did not apply to practices never heretofore regarded as opposed to good morals because...tendency unduly to hinder competition or create monopoly. This was a negative description. The Court made it positive in Federal Trade Commission v. Beechnut...