undefined | Better HN

0 pointsicebraining8y ago0 comments

Where does that article say they have fought attempts to charge for it?

What that article says is some environmental law experts claim it would likely be fought, and a statement by Nestle saying they are ready to discuss an amount if the state wants to. The fight it talks about is about a cap on the quantity of water, not on a price.

0 comments

2 comments · 1 top-level

ceejayoz8y ago· 1 in thread

The article discusses a previous court case they fought that gives them the ammo to fight usage restrictions.

> Now, "Nestle can argue under the Michigan Court of Appeals decision in 2005 that its pumping is within the scope of its reasonable use, to the extent it isn't harming anybody," he said. "And it doesn't have to pay for it."

icebrainingOP8y ago

That's what I said. The court case was about a cap, not payment. Nowhere in the article says they fought against a fee for taking out water.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse