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 : How high will Microsoft fly?
MSFT 488.02+0.2%Dec 24 12:59 PM EST

 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Dave who wrote (66885)4/9/2002 2:33:50 AM
From: The Duke of URLĀ©  Read Replies (3) of 74651
 
You know, just because you have the ability to string words together that are all found in any American Dictionary and then put a dot at the end, does not necessarily mean you can make a logical sentence, let alone a legal argument.

IF this guy had an antitrust action for to high a purchase price he would have won. I am not going to look it up but EVEN THE JACKSON COURT DID NOT FIND THAT MS OVERCHARGED consumers. That was one of the many weaknesses in his decision, he did not really find any current damage to the consumer, he found theoretical damage to consumers thru actual damage to competitors. That is not anti trust law.

This guy's original claim was that he was forced to use the operating system. The contract says, alright don't use it, but get your money from the vendor, the person who charged you WHAT EVER YOU PAID!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! But IF you use it, you can't get your money back.

You want to argue that for your perception of social reasons, that since the vendor is accused of child molestation, you get your money back.

This argument does not have a place in a civilized economic society.

But I mean that in the nicest possible way.

d.
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext