In the United States v. General Electric Company et al., 1926, the Supreme Court ruled in favor of General Electric (GE), upholding its right to set minimum resale prices for its patented products sold by licensees. The case revolved around GE's patent on a type of light bulb and their subsequent licensing agreements with other manufacturers that included price controls. The U.S government argued that this constituted illegal price-fixing under antitrust laws. However, the court held that as long as GE did not create an absolute monopoly or completely control production and sales, it was within its rights to impose such conditions due to patent law granting them exclusive rights over use and sale of their invention.

In the dissenting opinion for United States v. General Electric Company et al., Justice Brandeis argued that GE's patent licensing agreement, which allowed licensees to sell patented lamps at prices fixed by GE, constituted a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act. He contended that while patents grant monopolies over inventions, they do not permit price-fixing arrangements beyond those necessary to protect the patent rights themselves. The majority’s decision effectively permitted such arrangements under certain conditions and thus expanded monopoly powers granted by patents in ways Congress did not intend when it passed the Patent Act or Sherman Act. Furthermore, he believed this ruling would encourage anti-competitive behavior among businesses and stifle competition in markets where patented products are sold.