15 U.S.C. § 3501
Section 3501 · Exclusive territorial licenses to manufacture, distribute, and sell trademarked soft drink products; ultimate resale to consumers; substantial and effective competition
Amended 1 time on record
Applied in 15 court decisions — leading case Commonwealth of Pennsylvania v. Pepsico, Inc. (1988)
Most recently applied in Northern Bottling Co., Inc. v. PepsiCo, Inc. (July 2021)
How often courts cite this section
Court decisions citing this, by year.Markers show enactment, consequential amendments, and circuit splits over this section — watch for a citation surge after a change or a disagreement. The dip in the last several years is a data-coverage gap, not a real trend — our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so recent citations are undercounted.
Nothing contained in any antitrust law shall render unlawful the inclusion and enforcement in any trademark licensing contract or agreement, pursuant to which the licensee engages in the manufacture (including manufacture by a sublicensee, agent, or subcontractor), distribution, and sale of a trademarked soft drink product, of provisions granting the licensee the sole and exclusive right to manufacture, distribute, and sell such product in a defined geographic area or limiting the licensee, directly or indirectly, to the manufacture, distribution, and sale of such product only for ultimate resale to consumers within a defined geographic area: Provided, That such product is in substantial and effective competition with other products of the same general class in the relevant market or markets.
Editorial notes U.S. Code · Office of the Law Revision Counsel
Short Title
Section 1 of Pub. L. 96 308 provided that: “This Act [enacting this chapter] may be cited as the ‘Soft Drink Interbrand Competition Act’.”
Suspension of Statute of Limitations on Institution of Antitrust Proceedings by United States; Enforcement of Trademark Licensing Agreement Provisions Concerning Soft Drink Products
Section 4 of Pub. L. 96 308 provided that: “In the case of any proceeding instituted by the United States described in subsection (i) of section 5 of the Clayton Act (relating to suspension of the statute of limitations on the institution of proceedings by the United States) (15 U.S.C. 16(i)) which is pending on the date of the enactment of this Act [July 9, 1980], that subsection shall not apply with respect to any right of action referred to in that subsection based in whole or in part on any matter complained of in that proceeding consisting of the existence or enforcement of any provision described in section 2 of this Act [this section] in any trademark licensing contract or agreement described in that section.”