Ladies and Gentlemen, the rule of law at work. I think breaking the Boeing/Airbus duopoly has to be a good thing in the long run.
I should declare I'm a partisan for Airbus, because it bears noting that every Boeing whine, about unfair competition has been put back in its box: Seattle thinks it owns the business and has to be told to stop.
“The company shocked Seattle--and much of corporate America--by announcing in March that it is moving its headquarters out of the city where William Boeing created the company 85 years ago, making it synonymous with aircraft manufacturing.
“The move, Boeing said at the time, is part of a reorganization to give more independence to its three core businesses--commercial airplanes in the Seattle area, military jets and missiles in St. Louis and space and communications business in Southern California.”
e.g.: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/business/2016/09/22/transatlantic...
and:
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-09-04/wto-rules...
Also I am certain Boeing does not think it owns the business. But it does apparently believe it must play hard ball in terms of international litigation to survive. And given the case history with Airbus and Boeing basically attempting to put each other out of business, it doesn't seem such an unreasonable position to me - regardless of the merits of the current spat.