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: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (26448)	7/17/1999 9:23:00 AM
From: t2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

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? Yes! They basically told Bristol---you want money? Here is $1. That part of losing the lawsuit is even more important than MSFT winning on that issue. The dollar amount sends a clear message to future "bristols". The $1 was like a slap in the face of Bristol's lawyers!!!

To: Dwight E. Karlsen who wrote (26448)	7/17/1999 12:05:00 PM
From: miraje	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

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 A $1 award in a civil suit is the equivalent to tipping a waiter or waitress a penny. It's worse than nothing and a slap in the face. It implies bad service or a meritless lawsuit.