The existence of a lawsuit is not evidence.

john01dav 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

That's false. It's evidence, but it isn't conclusive. Someone thought that the law suit was worth filing, and that could be because the law suit has a chance of succeeding. It could also be some other reason, and it could also fail even if completely good faith -- this is why the evidence is non-conclusive.

▲

Klonoar a day ago | parent | next [-]

> Someone thought that the law suit was worth filing

No, someone thought that they could win a lawsuit.

We live in a highly litigious society. This happens all the time.

It's not _evidence_, it's _suspicion_, and it's asking it to be reviewed in a court of law.

▲

cromka 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

By your logic, counter-lawsuits and especially the SLAPP suits are also evidence.

	▲	fragmede 2 days ago \| parent [-]
		Still, RAM manufacturers have a long history of price fixing. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DRAM_industry_price_fixing

▲

MagicMoonlight 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]