Quote:
|
You are reading what you want to read into the Appellate court's reasoning. You are speculating I guess.
|
Actually, Barry, what I said regarding being "irreparably harmed by its abandonment by the credit card companies", as you quoted, is pretty much a direct quote from the actual Appellate Court opinion, if you had even bothered to read it. So I will quote it for you, from page 18 of the opinion.
Quote:
And when, finally, the judge denied that there was evi-
dence that Backpage had been irreparably harmed by its
abandonment by the credit card companies, he again con-
tradicted himself....
|
Moreover, the trial court made the EXACT same argument you are trying to make here, that Visa and MC have the right to process whomever they want and Backpage has no remedy for it. Quoting from the original opinion by Judge Tharp:
Quote:
|
Even if Backpage were correct, and it was not required to show that Dart's alleged threats had any coercive effect, the decision by the companies to terminate their relationships with Backpage because of the illegal and brand-damaging activity taking place in the adult section of Backpage.com is nevertheless relevant to show that injunctive relief is not appropriate here.
|
Obviously the Appellate Court disagreed with the District Court on this issue, as explained at length in the opinion. If Visa and MC simply had the right to process whomever they choose, as you argue, the issue would have been moot and the 7th Circuit would not have ordered the injunction. However, Visa and MC, and the banks they represent, are still subject to Federal law.