Eddins

Eddins v. Redstone

Good Law
134 Cal. App. 4th 290·2005 Cal. App. LEXIS 1835·2005 Daily Journal DAR 13557·35 Cal. Rptr. 3d 863·2005 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 9932
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 2005B168079California21,049 words

Opinion

Opinion

Boland, J.

SUMMARY

More than 250 independent video retailers sued Blockbuster Inc., its parent company Viacom Inc., Viacom’s controlling shareholder, Sumner Redstone, and the home-video affiliates of five major Hollywood movie studios, alleging antitrust and price discrimination violations under California law. The complaint centers upon output revenue-sharing agreements between the movie studios and Blockbuster, under which Blockbuster purchases video cassettes of the studios’ movies for rental to consumers. Under the agreements, Blockbuster purchases the videotapes at a low initial price, in exchange for a portion of the rental revenues and a long-term commitment by Blockbuster to purchase the entire output of movies from the studios. The plaintiffs do not challenge the agreements between Blockbuster and the studios. Instead, they allege Blockbuster and the studios conspired with each other to deny the same favorable terms and conditions to distributors for independent retailers. They also allege violations of the Unfair Practices Act—which forbids secret rebates, unearned discounts, and the secret extension of special privileges not available to all purchasers who buy on like…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.