Plaintiffs' Rift Disturbs Microsoft Judge nytimes.com
Meanwhile, today's NYT piece is background on the Posner appointment. Balanced as usual, if a bit dry.
As a hands-on mediator, Judge Posner, antitrust experts say, will likely try to give both sides a dose of reality. To the Government and states, these experts say, Judge Posner will probably point out that the outcome of the case, especially on appeal, may not favor them as much as Judge Jackson's findings alone might suggest.
To Microsoft, they add, he will likely stress that it may get a few allegations set aside on appeal, but it is now almost certainly going to be found a monopoly whose actions did violate the antitrust laws. They believe Judge Posner will say that settling the case now would spare Microsoft the risk of court-mandated remedies and then perhaps a raft of private litigation.
And in case anybody is wondering where people in the know go for their coverage on the matter, there's this:
In last week's meeting, Judge Jackson told the two sides that his decision to bring in Judge Posner was "partly motivated by what I think are somewhat disturbing reports in the press that the plaintiffs are proceeding on, quote, parallel tracks, or something like that."
Judge Jackson specifically cited an article in The New York Times a day earlier about the "divergent views" of the states and the Government. "I would not like to deal with divergent points of view," he told the lawyers.
Cheers, Dan. |
