Alexander Terekhov <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > David Kastrup wrote: >> >> No. It's been explained to you a few times, but you might have been >> drunk. Judge Tinder tried reading a sensible interpretation into >> Wallace's ramblings (if you don't have a lawyer representing you, >> turning your gibberish into something comprehensible is largely the >> duty of the judge) and constructed something which was most likely to >> be the _legal_ essence of Wallace's complaint. The result described >> in more appropriate terms what Wallace was supposed to be complaining >> about _if_ one did not want to assume that he was babbling nonsense in >> the first place. This refined wording of Wallace's alleged complaint >> was then matched to the respective laws and it was found that even >> when a judge tried making the best case from the mess Wallace >> presented, the results simply were not sufficient for making enough of >> a complaint that pursuing the case would have made any sense. >> >> That is pretty unexciting when the court is responsible for making >> Wallace's case. The court tried to make his case as good as a lawyer >> would have made it, sort of "if there is any angle to the case, it >> must have been this". Then it took a look at the results, and guess >> what: they still did not meet the requirements for proceeding, even >> when interpreted in the most favorable way. >> >> That's all. > > That's all bullshit. The FSF simply managed to fool Judge Tinder > that Wallace lacks standing. Tinder recorgnized that "Plaintiff’s > Third Amended Complaint States a Claim Upon Which Relief can be > Granted" and that "Plaintiff’s Allegations Sufficiently Set Forth a > Violation of the Rule of Reason", but he was fooled by FSF's "even > if it were possible for Plaintiff to allege some harm to competition > in the abstract, Plaintiff has not alleged antitrust injury to > himself, and thus lacks standing."
You have an interesting notion of "fooled". You'll find that every court can be "fooled" by substantial arguments, regardless of how many tantrums you throw. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ gnu-misc-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-misc-discuss
