The league's ability to pool television rights and merge with the rival AFL—actions illegal for most businesses—was only possible through specific legislation. These government-granted antitrust exemptions became a core, unassailable competitive advantage.

Franchisors argue they are a single entity to avoid antitrust conspiracy charges. Simultaneously, they claim franchisees are separate businesses to shield themselves from labor laws, unionization, and wage liability, creating a powerful, contradictory legal shield.

Technology like broadband-connected POS systems gives modern franchisors a real-time data stream and surveillance capability over their "independent" locations. This allows a degree of centralized control that exceeds what was possible for classically integrated corporations like U.S. Steel.

While a direct no-hire agreement between two franchisees is illegal, a franchisor can impose the same rule "vertically" from headquarters. This legal distinction allows them to create a system-wide cartel that limits worker mobility and suppresses wages across the entire brand.

The government's case against Live Nation/Ticketmaster isn't just about consumer frustration. It centers on the company allegedly using its dominance in promotions and venues to illegally force partners into using its ticketing service, thereby locking out competitors.

Counterintuitively, a genuinely free market is not a lawless one. It requires government restrictions to prevent predatory multinational corporations from creating monopolies. Without such regulations, monopolies would destroy the fair competition that is the basis of a free market.

Unchecked capitalism can lead to predatory monopolies like Standard Oil that consolidate power and stifle competition. Government intervention to break up these monopolies, while a dangerous game, is a necessary tool to preserve a competitive market.

The universally disliked car dealership model exists because of a century-old decision by Ford and GM to use franchises. These franchises then successfully lobbied for laws to protect their middleman position, entrenching an inefficient system that now creates opportunities for disruptors like Tesla who challenge these legal barriers.

Legal battles won by franchisors in the 1960s-70s weakened antitrust laws against "vertical restraints." This created the legal precedent allowing companies like Uber and Amazon to exert tight control over independent contractors without incurring employer liabilities.