Memorex Corporation, Etc. v. International Business MacHines Corporation, Memorex Corporation, Etc. v. International Business MacHines Corporation

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• switching to a different interconnection strategy “at least as justifiable as the alternative” does not violate monopolization law even if it forces a competitor to “change some of its product designs”
• directed verdict affirmed; no disposition as to striking plaintiffs’ demand for a jury trial

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).