Posted on 08/06/2024 9:28:13 AM PDT by Miami Rebel
Until you can actually quote a statue, regulation or Act that supports your ramblings I will consider you silly. You continue to argue through assertion and now toss in a Latin phrase, showing little understanding of what it actually means.
I am still waiting for you to provide support in your very clear statement that antitrust laws only apply to competitors.
First to quote you “The laws pertain to COMPETITORS, not customers.” and your most recent post doubles down on that assertion, again quoting you “Laws protecting competition apply to competitors: there are none here.”
I asked for your reference, give me the proof that supports your quote, instead you only assert it again and go down the road of sophistry. You are a confused person.
This discussion will not proceed further until you provide the legal justification for your assertion.
The good news for the defendants is that the burden is upon X to establish a duty for customers to sustain competition in an industry.
Likewise, the burden is on you to establish why advertisers aren’t free to boycott X.
If you can find a single case proving otherwise please share it.
I will say that the FTC’s site offers guidance (google “ftc boycotts”) on the legality of group boycotts and in each and every illustration the examples are of [excuse the word] competitors,
I’m done here, except to ask if public figures, let’s say Tucker Carlson and Elon Musk and Jesse Watters, were to advocate a boycott of Bud Light, might they be found liable for violating anti-trust or any other statute?
EXPLOITATION: How Meghan and Harry use the Archewell Parent Network as a Deflection...
GARM is just one entity involved.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.