Linking Cogs Corporation and Meshed Gears Inc. are competitors selling certain machine parts that are otherwise generally unattainable in their geographic market. This market includes the states of Minnesota, North Dakota, and South Dakota. Linking Cogs and Meshed Gears agree that Linking Cogs will no longer sell in Minnesota and that Meshed Gears will no longer sell in North and South Dakota. Have Linking Cogs and Meshed Gears violated any antitrust law? If so, which one? Explain. If they had divided their market by type of customer rather than geographic are, would the result be the same? Why or why not?

Linking Cogs and Meshed Gears have violated antitrust law. The major antitrust law they have violated is the Sherman Act, Section 1.
Linking Cogs and Meshed Gears are engaged in interstate commerce, and the agreement to divide marketing territories between them is a market division-a contract in restraint of trade. This sort of concerted action reduces the costs to the competitors and allows each of them to increase the prices of the parts sold in their respective territories.
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)could seek criminal penalties against each corporation, including fines and imprisonment. In addition, the DOJ could institute civil proceedings to restrain this conduct.
If these competitors had divided their market by type of customers-retailers and wholesalers, or manufacturers and distributors, for example-the result would most likely be the same.