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

[Alexander Terekhov]

Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote:
> 
> http://opensource.sys-con.com/read/224798.htm
> 
>         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.

regards,
alexander.