Lets Get Real About Microsoft and the Jeopardy of Antitrust Regulation
RE: "Does anyone out there have any opinions as to how long the trial or hearing or whatever you call this sideshow would last??"
The jeopardy to Microsoft of antitrust hearings and inquiries may be expected to persist for years to come. At issue would be the antitrust considerations of Microsoft's continued position in its Market Place.
RE: "BTW, do they argue this in front of a jury?? Who decides?? The experts or the people??"
The usual practice is for professional judges and regulators to hear arguments from professional attorneys. The arguments presented by the attorneys are fortified in part by the background research and testimony of technically competent experts in the fields discussed. Even the court can call in its own experts for consultation.
If jurors are involved in the process, the flow of evidence is orchestrated in a professional manner by the courts to aid jurors in making as fair a determination as possible under the law.
Technical issues are not considered to be a barrier to the process. By necessity, all technicalities are reduced to legal principles so that issues can be decided on their merits. Legal principle is area of expertise possessed by the courts. That is how courts are able to make definitive decisions on such diverse areas as Medicine, Commerce & Banking, Maritime Law, Patents, etc. This system, in one form or another, has existed for more than 4,000 years
The fact that the judge is not technically competent in the subject mater that he must apply the law to will in no way relieve Microsoft of having to participate in the process.
This is the people's system. The people are responsible for its outcome. So, in effect, and rightly or wrongly, it is the people who decide.
Hal |
