A typical commitment agreement is when a seller with market power for a product (the “binding” item) asks any customer who buys that item to also buy a second item (the “linked” item). The related item market is generally competitive and the seller uses market power for the first item (the “binding”) to increase sales in the competitive market for the second item. Some commitment agreements are illegal in the United States, both under Sherman Antitrust and Section 3 of the Clayton Act.  A contract of engagement is defined as “an agreement of one party to sell a product, but only on the condition that the buyer buys another product (or bound) or at least accepts that he does not purchase the product from another supplier.”  Engagement can be the activity of several companies as well as the work of a company. The success of a claim of commitment generally requires proof of four elements: (1) These are two distinct products or services; 2. The purchase of the binding product depends on the additional purchase of the related product; (3) the seller has sufficient power in the binding product market; (4) A significant portion of intergovernmental trade in the related products market is affected.  Commitment agreements are not necessarily unlawful. Cartel problems are raised by binding agreements to the extent that they are used to maintain or increase the seller`s existing market power or to impede competition in the related product market. Third, a seller must have sufficient market power in a binding product to limit competition on a related product.
Market power is measured by the number of buyers the seller has attracted to enter into a specific commitment agreement. Sellers are expanding their market power by encouraging additional buyers to purchase a related product. However, sellers are prohibited from dominating a given market by imprisoning a disproportionate proportion of potential buyers in liaison agreements. If a seller requires buyers to purchase a second product or service as a precondition for obtaining a first product or service, this may be contrary to federal cartel laws. It is called a liaison agreement or a commitment agreement. Unlike other terms of sale, such as trust, bundling and exclusive transactions. B commitment agreements can, in certain situations, create liability in themselves for cartels and abuse of dominance. This departure from these other “vertical” agreements is largely explained by the mandatory aspect of the link, which creates an all-or-nothing offer for the customer and successfully prevents competitors from competing with customers for the service of these customers. An agreement in which the seller conditions the sale of a product (the “binding” product) to the buyer`s consent to the purchase of a separate product (the “linked” product) by the seller.
Alternatively, it is also considered a liaison agreement if the seller conditions the sale of the product related to the buyer`s agreement not to buy the product related to another seller.