Print

Print


Dear All-

As your President, and keeper of legalities, I am hoping that we can
all <be sensible> and be aware in our discussion that collusion is
not either taking place or looking-like taking place. Take it
off-list if need be.

Gail points out that prices vary all over the country.

I like the statement Frank quoted below from Roberta's posting (and
it reflects on why we like to meet in one-restaurant towns!).

Just be sensible, otherwise there really will be rules and a
rule-keeper. The Guild cannot afford to pay for a rule-keeper, and
Lana doesn't have time to be one. She is too busy helping Jaynie with
Williamsburg.

Why not take up this informal info-sharing in actual time, over a
beer, the week of 3 July (...if we can agree on a restaurant...) Much
safer.


-Clara





>They know artists couldnít collude to go to a restaurant." He
>knows his subject.
>
>-frank


>
>According to U.S. anti-trust law, a group of competitors can't get together
>and "collude" to set standard prices. Since most of us are independent
>contractors (as far as our freelance work is concerned), we all essentially
>compete with one another.
>
>As I understand it, it's OK for two people to get together informally and
>discuss pricing. But it's not OK for an organization to facilitate
>widespread price fixing. This is considered collusion. The only exception
>is a trade union where members can set standard prices and engage in
>collective bargaining.
>
>You could make the argument that the GNSI is facilitating price fixing by
>allowing people to use this listserv to collude on prices. This could get
>the GNSI in hot water with the FTC. The AMI listserv prohibits discussion
>of prices and price strategies specifically for this reason. I'm not aware
>of any GNSI policy about this, but it's something to think about.
>
>The Graphic Artists Guild, on the other hand, can get away with publishing
>"standard" prices (in their Handbook of Pricing and Ethical Guidelines)
>because they are organized as a trade union. At least, that's what I heard
>recently.
>
>Jim