Price information exchanges that do not impact pricing. Such an exchange by itself is probably not subject to private challenge. See, e.g., Blomkest Fertilizer, Inc. v. Potash Corp. of Sask., Inc., 203 F.3d 1028 (8th Cir. 2000) (price verifications only concerned charges on particular completed sales, not future market prices; no evidence supported inference that the verifications had an impact on price increases; the only evidence was that prices were possibly cut as a result; defense summary judgment affirmed).
Note, however, that a price information exchange could be viewed as a “plus factor” that tends to support an inference of an actual price agreement. Therefore, it is always advisable to consider the antitrust implications of any exchange of price information before engaging in such an exchange.