[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;)
From: |
Alexander Terekhov |
Subject: |
Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;) |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Mar 2006 18:59:39 +0100 |
David Kastrup wrote:
[...]
> So you feel unable to face the facts.
The fact is that the GPL price-fixes IP at zero. The fact is that
zero is below cost of IP creation and hence is predatory. As for the
rest,
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?court=us&vol=495&invol=328
"Held:
1. Actionable "antitrust injury" is an injury of the type the
antitrust laws were intended to prevent and that flows from that which
makes defendants' acts unlawful. Injury, although causally related to
an antitrust violation, will not qualify unless it is attributable to
an anticompetitive aspect of the practice under scrutiny, since it is
inimical to the antitrust laws to award damages for losses stemming
from continued competition. Cargill, Inc. v. Monfort of Colorado, Inc.,
479 U.S. 104, 109 -110. P. 334
2. A vertical, maximum-price-fixing conspiracy in violation of 1
of the Sherman Act must result in predatory pricing to cause a competitor
antitrust injury. Pp. 335-341."
> Thanks for making this obvious.
> You shouldn't complain, however, that the judge in this case has _not_
> like you ignored the plain facts.
Judge Tinder clearly erred.
regards,
alexander.
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), (continued)
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/21
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Rui Miguel Silva Seabra, 2006/03/21
- Message not available
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/21
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/22
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/27
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/22
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;),
Alexander Terekhov <=
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), David Kastrup, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Merijn de Weerd, 2006/03/24
- Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Who'd guess.... ;), Alexander Terekhov, 2006/03/24