Q: There is a kosher pizza store in town. Can the owner restrain me from opening a competing store?

A: This issue of hasagas gevul (interfering in another’s business) is addressed in Bava Basra 21b. Tannaim dispute whether one can prevent someone from opening a competing business adjacent to his. Most Rishonim rule that the first tradesman cannot prevent him unless the potential competitor lives and pays taxes in another city (C.M. 156:5). Nowadays, due to the different circumstances of commerce, we usually cannot prevent a competitor even from a different city. However, the Gemara introduces the concept of pasakta l’chiyusi (you cut off my livelihood). If the newcomer threatens to cut off the income of the original tradesman entirely, many rule that he has the right to restrain the competitor (Pischei Teshuva 156:3; Igros Moshe C.M. #38). Furthermore, he is prohibited to compete in an unfair manner, such as by selling below cost (Erech Shai 228:18). Thus, the ability of the pizza store owner to restrain you from opening is very restricted. However, it is meritorious not to encroach upon another’s livelihood (Chavas Yair #42).

Q: I obtained access to the customer base of my competitor. Can I run a telemarketing campaign aimed directly at his clients?

A: We mentioned last week that it is usually not possible to restrain someone from opening a competing store, since each store operates independently. However, it is problematic to target another person’s client base. Since the person invested effort and resources to establish this client base and has specific expectations to maintain their business, such marketing encroaches on his rights (Tosfos Kiddushin 59a).

Established clients are known in halacha as “ma’arufya.” The Rama cites two opinions and practices as to whether a person can restrict others from encroaching upon his established clients and dealing with them (C.M. 156:5). This restriction applies both to non-Jewish clients and, in a more significant way, to Jewish clients.

However, if you open a competing store and advertise publicly, you can serve your competitor’s clients who come of their own accord (Chasam Sofer C.M. #175). It is also permitted for you to provide promotional incentives, discounts and bonuses, since the other store can do the same (C.M. 228:18).

Q: I operate a long-distance telecommunication company. Verizon and Sprint are constantly running campaigns aimed at my clients and offering incentives for them to “switch over.” May I run a similar campaign to attract new clients, which will also target customers of another Jewish-owned telecommunication company?

A: We learned last week about the law of “ma’arufya,” which restricts the right to target another company’s established clients. However, this law does not seem to apply to the current long-distance telecommunication industry.

In this field, there are ongoing battles over clients, and constant offers to switch from one company to another. For this reason, no company has the expectation that its current clients will necessarily stay with them.

Certainly, when there is consistent client competition by non-Jewish companies, it is not possible to restrict a Jew from competing, since restricting him will not protect the other Jewish business anyway (see Rama C.M. 156:5 and Pischei Choshen, Geneivah ch. 9 n. 20).

Q: Is there halachic basis to give priority to patronizing Jewish businesses?

A: Toras Kohanim derives from the verse, “When you sell something to your fellow or buy from the hand of your fellow” (Vayikra 25:14), that one should give commercial priority to his Jewish brethren. This halacha is not mentioned in Shulchan Aruch; it is cited by responsa. Poskim debate whether the law applies if the non-Jew sells for cheaper. Rama (Responsa #10) cites this law to give priority to an edition of the Rambam printed by Maharam Padua over a competing, cheaper edition printed by a non-Jew. He understands from the Gemara (B.M. 71a; Pesachim 21b) that the law applies even if there will be a loss in buying from the Jew. On the other hand, some achronim argue that this law is only “proper advice” (Korban Ha’eda on Toras Kohanim). Others rule that it applies only when there is no price differential (Maharsham in Mishpat Shalom C.M. 189). Maharam Shick (C.M. #31) also maintains that a businessman does not need to buy from a Jewish supplier who is more expensive, but should do so if it is only an issue of convenience. There is a third, middle position advocated by some acharonim, which will be discussed next week, IY”H.

Q: Am I expected to patronize the local Jewish grocery store if the Pathmark Superstore is cheaper or more convenient?

A: Dayan Y. Y. Weiss zt”l addresses this question in Minchas Yitzchak (III:129), discussing the opposing opinions of the Rama and other Acharonim mentioned last week.

He leans towards differentiating between a small price difference, in which case you should patronize the Jewish store, and a large price difference, in which case you are not required to suffer a loss. [This is also the understanding of the Chofetz Chaim (Ahavas Chesed 5:6-7) in the opinion of the Rama.]

However, Minchas Yitzchak concludes that if the small Jewish storeowner will be driven out of business and lose his livelihood, there is a greater need to support him if the customer can afford it, even if there is a significant price difference.

Thus, according to the Maharsham and other Acharonim mentioned last week, there is no requirement to patronize the Jewish business if it’s more expensive.

However, it is meritorious to follow this middle position and patronize the Jewish business if it costs only slightly more, and certainly if it is only an issue of convenience.

Q: Can I post a fictitious “rate this seller” review on Amazon.com et al. that applauds my own company or discredits my competitor’s company?

A: Posting a fictitious comment applauding your own company is deceitful, even if the information is correct. It might also involve geneivas da’as (misleading people), since readers expect such comments to be unbiased reports from customers and decide to make purchases based on them (C.M. 228:6; Tzitz Eliezer XV:12). Instead, you should encourage customers who had positive experiences to post reviews.

Posting a fictitious comment discrediting your competitor is motzi shem ra, a severe form of lashon hara. In truth, any person has to be careful when posting a negative review. The reason to allow doing so is the need (to’eles) to warn other potential customers about dealing with that company. The Chofetz Chaim (Rechilus 9:2) requires that the information be true, without exaggeration, and with proper intent to warn the consumer - not out of hatred or intent to disparage the seller’s reputation. Therefore, a competitor should avoid posting even a true negative review, since it is almost impossible for him to have proper intent.

Q: May I advertise my product’s advantages over another’s, stating his name?

A: This is permitted if the information is true and that you are careful to avoid geneivas daas (misleading) and lashon hara. For example, it would be misleading to compare your product equipped with optional add-ons against your competitor’s basic product, when he provides the same add-on features. To compare the low price of your basic model against the high price of his fully-loaded model is equally misleading. However, if you are running a sale you may compare your sale price to his full price if you note “sale” and “regular” price. The customer can easily check if the competitor is also running a sale now (C.M. 228:11).

Writing derogatory statements about your competitor is lashon hara. If you outperformed your competitor in a customer survey, you can advertise that, but if the competitor was rated dismally, publicizing his result is lashon hara. Even if information is readily available, it is still prohibited if your intention is to disparage him or gain from his failure (Chofetz Chaim Lashon Hara 2:3).

Q: May I browse a store’s showroom if I don’t actually intend to buy anything there?

A: It is prohibited to cheat a person monetarily (ona’ah) or emotionally (ona’as devorim). You may not ask a seller how much an item costs when you have no interest in buying. This gives the seller the impression that you might buy, and he is disappointed when you don’t. It also distracts him when he could deal with other customers (C.M. 228:1,4).

Walking into a store similarly raises the seller’s expectation that you might buy, albeit to a lesser degree, so you shouldn’t browse if you have no interest in buying. It is permissible to browse, though, if there is any possibility that you might buy there. Any store owner knows that potential customers comparison shop and might decide not to buy there (Pischei Choshen, Ona’ah 15 nt. 15). Furthermore, browsing in a store full of customers is permissible if you do not distract the salespeople, since the owner or salespeople do not note an individual person who enters and browses.