I don’t really care, because no one listens much to him anymore… but he has essentially made-up, of whole cloth, what the California appeals panel held.
The court did not find the manufacturer liable for NOT bringing a product to market, but instead for intentionally engaging in anti-competitive behavior (lawless monopolies, used to prevent newer product innovations, and intentional product delays, to stifle real competition in the HIV therapeutics arena — and extend the life of the older product, creating an artificial, and thus unlawful resale price maintenance scheme).
Whether it will stand at the Supremes, after a review, remains to be seen, but this is NOT (as John sensationally claims) a case of a company being sued for deciding a product would not be economic to produce.
What a feckless… liar he is, that John.
Powerline Lies... 