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 : How high will Microsoft fly? -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Gerald Walls who wrote (26339)	7/16/1999 2:14:00 PM
From: Lao Ou	Read Replies (4) \| Respond to of 74651

Touch that 100 mark. Touch it. Make Bill a 100 billionaire and us happy. Z

To: Gerald Walls who wrote (26339)	7/17/1999 5:17:00 AM
From: Dwight E. Karlsen	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74651

Gerald, re >The jury did find, however, that Microsoft had committed deceptive practices in violation of the Conn. Unfair Trade Practices Act, but awarded Bristol Technology Inc. just $1 in that claim.< That is very curious. It sounds as if the jury may have felt forced (by judge's instructions?) to "follow the letter of the law and facts", in reaching a verdict re Conn. Unfair Trade Practices Act. BUT, in awarding just $1 to Bristol, was the jury trying to make their feelings known to Bristol? I don't understand that $1 award, just trying to make sense of it. Verrry strange! And curious. I feel like Alice. "Curiouser and curiouser", cried Alice!