Screw her, and may the judge slap the filing attorney with the court costs.
Good explanation of the Robinson-Patman Act:
http://www.imakenews.com/strategicprici ... ?x=b11,0,w
Problems I see (me != lawyer, but...)
- the iPhone is unique. There is no comparable product.
- 'exclusive' phones (that is, carrier A gets phone for first 12, 18 months after launch) are nowhere near new. This has been going on for how long?
(Also, this is not covered in Robinson-Patman.)
-Robison-Patman was (as far as I know/can tell) enacted mainly to prevent underpricing
(that is, intentionally selling at/below cost to drive a smaller competitor out of business.) This fits that how?
So, the people that bought Quads earlier this year @ ~$500 should sue Intel over this summer's price cuts, too? (Just an example...)
Two words for her: