[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Again. Who'd guess.... ;)

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Hey Terekhov: Wallace lost. Again. Who'd guess.... ;)
Date: Mon, 22 May 2006 20:44:31 +0200
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux)

Alexander Terekhov <> writes:

> Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
>>         The second decision came from a different judge in the Southern
>>         District of Indiana and, like the first judge and the FSF
>>         complaint, he found that Wallace didn't properly state a claim.
>>         He said he accepted the allegations as true but that Wallace
>>         didn't allege anticompetitive effects in an identifiable market
> The District Court is clearly in error. Predatory pricing has the 
> requisite anticompetitive effect (ARCO). The Appellate Court will 
> correct the district court's mistake.

Oh, I am pretty sure the appelate court will be "clearly in error",
too.  And whatever other courts Wallace chooses to pester with his
inability to make a case.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]