Yes it says you 'can', it's legally possible. It also outlines the standards one has to adhere to, to do it, which are pretty high.
Just saying that under certain conditions a thing can be done does not say anything about your ability to meet those conditions.
I was in the Army. I was trained to drive a tank. I could drive one across town to get coffee. Does that mean I'm going to do that tomorrow? Even if I woke up in the morning and found one sitting in front of my house?
A lot of people w/o legal training or some understanding of the 'legal world' think sure you can just go get coffee w/the tank. People w/that understanding see that it's not that way at all. The general thought on this board and others about Wed. hearing was and is that the HFs lost and that the judge showed some sort of favor or learning to the Management side, which is not what happened or was demonstrated at all. They haven't the faintest idea that the judge was eminently correct and fair in his rulings and did the best for all parties. It would take at least 15 minuets to get them to begin to see how wrong they are, because they don't understand what is before the court and how courts deal w/issues. Look at my other posts about the hearing, maybe they'll give you some better insight in to what's goin' on and how this works.
Market Data 
Markets 
AI
