Question: Local 366 of the Brewery, Bottling, Can & Allied Industrial Union called a strike against the Coors bottling plant in Golden, Colorado. Local 366 was affiliated with the AFL-CIO and received nationwide union support for a boycott of Coors beer during the strike. During the course of this protracted labor dispute, Coors made an agreement with KQED, a broadcasting station in the San Francisco Bay Area, under which the brewer would provide financial support and volunteers for a Coors Day portion of the station's annual fund-raising telethon. Prior to the telethon, an article appeared in the San Francisco Bay Guardian, which stated that Coors "is notorious for antiunion activities during a ... strike" and had long been "the subject of a laborbacked nationwide boycott."
Following the appearance of the article, the coordinator of the Northern California Chapter of the Coors Boycott Committee met with the KQED general manager to inform him of the swelling opposition to Coors Day, allegedly warning him not to stumble into a "shooting war" and that he could not guarantee the safety of the teleauction volunteers. KQED subsequently canceled Coors Day, and Coors sued the coordinator and other union supporters for damages. Was the boycott group a labor organization under the jurisdiction of the NLRA? If so, did the boycott group violate the NLRA? Did it violate the federal antitrust laws? Did it violate any state laws? If so, would a state court have had jurisdiction of the case? See Adolph Coors Co. v. Wallace [570 F. Supp. 202, 115 L.R.R.M. 3100 (N.D. Cal. 1984)].