|
|
|
|
|
by stefan_
2476 days ago
|
|
I think you missed that this injunction is the case? You are saying "the injunction was to stop LinkedIn from blocking access while [the injunction request] is ongoing". If the court didn't think hiq had a strong case they would not have granted the initial injunction, then reaffirmed it on this appeal. |
|
It still might be case that hiQ has less than a 50% chance of winning in the eyes of the appeals court.