I don't think that's an issue, a trademark holder could probably license at $0 to company A if the contract contained some other consideration. Obviously, if it

I don't think that's an issue, a trademark holder could probably license at $0 to company A if the contract contained some other consideration. Obviously, if it appeared to be a part of an anti-competitive/collusion scheme then the trademark holder might run afoul of those laws. The problem is that the license can serve to dilute your mark or cause market confusion. For example, if you're Kimberly-Clark and you license a small indie tissue brand to use the word "kleenex" then suddenly you've created the consumer confusion that your trademark is supposed to prevent. There is a special case in the 'certification mark,' like THX, Wi-Fi or the Good Housekeeping Seal. Here, the whole point is to license the mark based on a set of (often loose) criteria.