If in fact
the original ruling of the Competition Tribunal was correct, simply put, it would mean the Competition Act does not apply to TREB and its rules relating to how the «sold data» may be used.
Not exact matches
Overnight, given the fact that Decision 18/4 had been implemented in January
of 2014, yet had not been utilized in PGA TOUR
competition, the
Rules Committee reopened the incident and focused on how much the use
of sophisticated technology played a part in making the
original ruling.
Celebrating 20 years
of Pokémon battles, the Kanto Classic Online
Competition features
rules that mirror competitive play from the
original Pokémon Red and Pokémon Blue games.
I published the whole FRAND passage
of Judge Posner's
ruling, and while Judge Posner makes reference to eBay in his overall denial
of injunctive relief in the Apple v. Motorola case, you can read the
original text in that blog post and you'll see that Judge Posner's position on FRAND is entirely independent from the four eBay factors: it's a general
competition / antitrust and common sense kind
of argument.
Promotional contests in Canada are largely governed by the federal
Competition Act (statutory disclosure and misleading advertising
rules), federal Criminal Code (provisions governing «illegal lotteries» that must be avoided), federal and provincial privacy legislation (relating to the collection
of entrant personal information), the common law
of contract (contests have been held to be contracts) and intellectual property laws (e.g., relating to the transfer
of original artistic materials, for example in skill contests, or reproduction
of 3rd party logos, trade - marks or other intellectual property not owned by a contest organizer).
I believe that this matter was not being judged on its merits, as it relates to the
Competition Tribunal, and the «redetermination hearing» — I believe that the
original ruling of the Tribunal was correct.