Referring again to this definition of Restraint of Trade, continuing to give consideration to current events;
We’ll take a look at the third court determined legal standard, the Truncated Rule of Reason. There really isn’t much there yet its importance is just as great;
“The truncated rule of reason test is used in cases where the per se test is not applicable but where nonetheless “no elaborate industry analysis is required to demonstrate the anticompetitive character” of the restraint (NCAA v. Board of Regents of the University of Oklahoma).”
I don’t want to neglect additional considerations or anti-competitive trade practices violators might engage …read more

I think this is worth passing along because it might be useful in a number of online situations currently being discussed…
Restraint of Trade
The people who wrote the Sherman Anti-Trust Act were purposefully vague because they apparently wanted to leave many decisions about this up to the courts and it worked. Since 1890, “the courts have come up with three different legal standards to be used in determining restraint of trade.” This is one;
Rule of reason

And one of the first few thoughts are whether or not that is fair, legal, greedy or monopolistic?
Down under, they are concerned with eBay Australia’s requirement that sellers only offer PayPal as a payment processor for their auctions.
eBay Australia Sellers React to PayPal-Only Policy
“eBay Australia made a decision to remove direct deposit, money orders and checks as payment options”
Are eBay Australia’s New Payment Restrictions Fair Trade?