SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Technology Stocks : All About Sun Microsystems
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: rudedog who wrote (47779)3/8/2002 1:58:03 PM
From: QwikSand  Read Replies (1) of 64865
 
BTW I happen to think that in the first case, the judge was right - MSFT could, and did, ignore the spirit of the decree while following the letter in what some called "malicious compliance", which is exactly what the judge feared.

Dog, a few observations:

a) If they ignored the first consent decree, as the judge feared, why won't they ignore the present one?

b) I find the DOJ's 180 a little too extreme. Yes, the curren't DOJ's view (at least on the record) is that the MSFT deal, which allows MSFT to define all kinds of things in its sole discretion, is "the best they can get". Somehow I don't quite think the Clinton DOJ would have held the same view at this point in the proceedings.

c) The earlier decree didn't follow litigation that Microsoft lost. The reason all these private suits are now enabled is because they followed litigation that Microsoft lost, not once but twice. While that advantageous position is somehow serving to put the brakes on the Dubya DOJ, it's at the same time empowering private plaintiffs.

--QS
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News