[dlgeek]

I'm not so sure - looks like the law might very well be in their favor. (You could argue about the merits of the law, but not the lawsuit).

http://www.malegislature.gov/Laws/GeneralLaws/PartI/TitleXV/... - (c) It shall be deemed a violation of subsection (a) of section 3 for a manufacturer, distributor or franchisor representative:

(10) to own or operate, either directly or indirectly through any subsidiary, parent company or firm, a motor vehicle dealership located in the commonwealth of the same line make as any of the vehicles manufactured, assembled or distributed by the manufacturer or distributor.

(It goes on with a bunch of exceptions that I'm not qualified to evaluate)

WRT standing, Section 6 of the chapter, part E allows other dealerships to sue to stop the establishment of franchises (which this arguably may be) and section F specifically states that "the fact that a protesting dealer has standing shall not be considered by the court in assessing the merits of the protest;"

They may very well have a strong case.

[sixQuarks]

The wording doesn't make sense. It basically says no manufacturer can operate a dealership that's located in the "commonwealth of the same line make" - what the hell does that mean?

I interpret it as meaning no manufacturer can operate a dealership within the same territory as an existing dealership that sells the manufacturer's make.

So if that's correct, then the judge did the right thing. Since Tesla doesn't have any dealers to compete with.

[sophacles]

You are randomly highlighting and declaring nonsense. Well done non-sequitur man. "in the commonwealth" is one prepositional phrase meaning "within the boundaries of Massachusetts". "of the same line make" is a different prepositional phrase meaning "make and model" (presumably either the legal term or an older legal term meaning that).

It doesn't refer to existing or non-existing dealerships. It says the manufacturer cannot own a dealership that sells that car. Furhter, it cannot do so through a subsidiary or shell company. Even further, it prohibits "distributors" and "assemblers" from using funky language and/or corporate ownership games to get around the restriction.

[stcredzero]

I hope that not having dealers becomes a competitive advantage for them. I further hope that other car companies respond by creating subsidiaries that make entirely different lines of cars that are electric cars.

[hdevalence]

The Commonwealth of Massachusetts.

[jlgreco]

An absurd law does not render an absurd lawsuit sane.

[IheartApplesDix]

It does when money is involved.

[jlgreco]

Perhaps if you are a lawyer. I am not.

[tomjen3]

Given that the Judge threw the lawsuit out, it seems fairly difficult not to argue against it.

But even if he had not, I would still argue against it, as it shows an extreme lack of morals on the part of the francishers.

[ksherlock]

The judge dismissed the suit over a lack of standing, which the law specifically says he can't do. If the lawsuit was really so absurd, he should have had a stronger reason to dismiss it.