A data aggregation company failed to show sufficient evidence of...
A data aggregation company failed to show sufficient evidence of discriminatory treatment to justify a court’s grant of a preliminary injunction against Comcast, the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled Wednesday (http://xrl.us/bnriij). The case involved directory assistance data, provided…
Sign up for a free preview to unlock the rest of this article
Timely, relevant coverage of court proceedings and agency rulings involving tariffs, classification, valuation, origin and antidumping and countervailing duties. Each day, Trade Law Daily subscribers receive a daily headline email, in-depth PDF edition and access to all relevant documents via our trade law source document library and website.
to third-party aggregators and used for directory-related services. Comcast signed an agreement with the aggregator LSSi in 2007, but terminated the arrangement four years later, and said it would provide access to its data only through a new company, Targus. LSSi filed suit, alleging Comcast’s new arrangement was discriminatory under certain nondiscrimination provisions of the Communications Act -- Sections 202, 222(e) and 251(b)(3). The district court granted a preliminary injunction to LSSi, finding a “substantial likelihood of success” on the merits of its claim. But the 11th Circuit said the decision was an abuse of discretion: LSSi did not show it was likely to succeed, because it had not yet shown substantial evidence of discriminatory treatment. “Asking what we understand to be the correct question -- whether Comcast through its agent Targus will discriminate between itself and LSSi -- we conclude that LSSi has not shown a substantial likelihood of success on the merits,” the appeals court wrote. The “potential” for unlawful discrimination is present, but further discovery is necessary to determine that, the court wrote.