Microsoft Continues Jockeying To Pare Back or End Antitrust Case nytimes.com
With a headline like that, it has to be the NYT.
Though helped by the appeals court ruling, Microsoft is unlikely to get the case dismissed, antitrust experts say. To grant the motion for summary judgment, Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson must find that the facts in the case are essentially not in dispute.
But the Justice Department and the states argue forcefully that many facts remain in dispute. They note that unlike the appeals court ruling, the outcome of a trial in the current case will hinge on findings of fact.
Well, as Ronald Reagan said, facts are stupid things. Totally random, beyond bizzarre, Bill might want to add. I forget the John Donahoe variation.
The conflicting evidence represented by Microsoft's internal memos already in the public record, antitrust experts say, suggests why it is unlikely that Judge Jackson will grant Microsoft's motion for summary judgment.
"The E-mail provides ammunition for both sides, which is what you'd expect in any big corporation," said Robert Litan, a former senior official in the Justice Department's antitrust division, who is now at the Brookings Institution, a research organization. "All that Justice and the states need to show is that a few facts are in dispute -- and there is a pretty good argument that there are."
Not in the mind of the objective, rational Microphile. "Microsoft Rules" is the only fact that matters in the elusive and effervescent context of the Mind of Reg(TM).
Cheers, Dan. |
