Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : AUTOHOME, Inc -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: E. Davies who wrote (11551)	6/21/1999 10:35:00 AM
From: lml	Respond to of 29970

The law will decide, not analogies. Eric: The law does not always provide the answer. Sometimes the law is "black letter" & some times the law is less explicit by its often ambiguity. This is why appellate decisions are so important in understanding the law. When the law is in question lawyers are called upon to provide persuasive arguments as to why the law should be tailored to properly address the circumstances of the instant case. The underpinnings of the law is policy. This is what we're talking about here. Sometimes an analogy becomes a very persuasive tool of the lawyer. If you follow the MSFT-DOJ case, you will hear the lawyers refer very often to an analogy to explain or argue their case before the judge. While our analogy may in-fact have limited applications, it is certainly not a useless exercise. It helps to explain. It also explains why it is important that somewhat like Frank is able to point out such shortcomings to "derail" a persuasive argument. The process, IMHO, is what is important here.