Posted:
Originally posted by: .Lakhan.
That tie-in-agreement forced Single Screen owners which only gave 600 Screens to SOS, without that agreement it would have got 1200.
CCI rejected case coz ADF announced release date later on, but what YRF did booking 3 months in advance, just at the time of ETT, making it impossible for exhibitors to say NO to YRF, all this looks desperate measures, which even showed in box office performance of film.
Tie-in agreements are not illegal..As per the Competition Act, tie-in agreement is not anti-competitive except when it has an adverse impact on the competition..And CCI rejecting AD's claim has nothing to do with ADF announcing the dates later on..It doesn't matter who announced the dates first..Thats not even a prerogative while deciding the case..Morality aside, even in normal business dealings, ppl usually enter into tie-in agreements, exclusive supply and distribution agreements etc..They are just business strategies and they are not anti-competitive per se..Yes, personally in case of films, viewers should be given a choice to watch what they want and i personally think it shouldn't happen but what YRF did was not legally wrong..Here is the full judgment in case anyone is interested..Its quite an interesting read-
http://www.cci.gov.in/sites/default/files/662012_0.pdf
comment:
p_commentcount