To: blankmind who wrote (25985 ) 7/13/1999 11:33:00 PM From: RTev Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74651
basically, I'm saying, that this case never should've gotten this far - it's totally without merit Hey. For once I agree with you (if only on one of three points). Based on the limited news coming out of this trial, it seems astounding that it got past summary judgment. One can find an attorney who will say just about anything on any particular case, but the guy who released a press release earlier seems to have nailed this one when he called it "an attempt by Bristol to play the American litigation lottery." Unfortunately, juries in antitrust cases can sometimes come out with bizarre decisions. On the other trial front, ZDNet offers this summary of DOJ antitrust enforcement under Joel Klein:zdnet.com Some highlights:Antitrust actions under Klein have been "extremely aggressive" when it comes to the high tech sector, said Breton Bocchieri, an intellectual property and high tech lawyer with Arter & Hadden in California. That stance is "neither good or bad, it's a fact of life," Bocchieri said. Such aggressive enforcement actions are needed, Bocchieri said, adding the "process of implementation needs to reflect the modern paradigm." ... Taking aim at the high tech sector is really a "chicken and egg problem," said Andrew Gavil, an antitrust law professor at the Howard University Law School. The Department of Justice is "aggressively watching a sector of the economy that (a) is generating a lot of wealth and economic progress; and (b) is exhibiting signs of stress through aggressive behavior," Gavil said. Underlying the DoJ's aggressive look at high tech, Gavil said, are market forces that are "a rarity in our far-flung economy: Genuinely aggressive activity by genuinely dominant firms." And one more that will be more palatable to most of those here:The push into the high tech sector can be linked to the underlying philosophy of the Clinton administration, says Robert Levy, a senior fellow with the Washington-based Cato Institute, a Libertarian think tank. Levy characterizes the administration as having "a predisposition toward government solutions... they are fundamentally distrustful of the free market to police itself." Levy also believes the DOJ's interest in high tech is being driven by disaffected competitors. But then......Arguing against the implication that his division acts as a front man for disgruntled companies, Klein says the "cynics among us can always try and harmonize events with a theory," but the fact is, some cases "are meritorious and some are not." And in the future?What other high tech areas might be red flags for antitrust enforcement action? One potential target could be the aggregation of companies and technologies being cobbled together by Internet portals, such as America Online and Yahoo!. AOL, in particular, has made no secret of the fact that it intends to compete head on with Microsoft for the heart and soul of Internet surfers with its so-called "AOL Everywhere" strategy. ... These alliances are in the spirit of cooperation, which is not an illegal activity. However, if they are doing so with the intent of monopolizing a sector of the industry, that does breach antitrust laws. It also puts Klein in a quandary: he would have to prosecute some of the very companies his lawyers relied on as key witnesses during the Microsoft trial.