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: t2 who wrote (31942)	11/5/1999 8:39:00 PM
From: jmac	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

"down here"? Where are you?

To: t2 who wrote (31942)	11/5/1999 8:50:00 PM
From: Gerald Walls	Respond to of 74651

If you believe what you have said about the American lawyers at state and federal levels(tobacco, guns etc), you got serious problems down there. It won't stop there. Alcohol and autos will be next. After all, if they can sue someone for something that was harmful when last available over 25 years ago (lead paint) then why can't they sue for something harmful that's still being made (alcohol)? I can see the class actions now: wives of abusive, alcoholic husbands; victims of drunk drivers; etc. There's already been one wacko proposal by an environmental group to tax high-fat food and the products used to make them (beef and pork, the range land issue being their true target), so why not a class action for everyone who suffered from cardio-vascular disease or had a family member die of it? And those evil auto makers, selling those Environmentally-Unfriendly, Deadly SUV's... How many people have been needlessly killed because their politically-correct high MPG car was crumpled like tinfoil by a gas-guzzling SUV? We all just know that they could have put the environment and safety first over profits and just refused to make those things.

To: t2 who wrote (31942)	11/5/1999 10:04:00 PM
From: RTev	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Remember Bristol. The Caldera lawsuit is also going to jury and i am willing to bet MSFT will win there as well. The cases are so different that there's little reason to compare the two. Even if they were more similar, we're talking about a Utah jury that's considering harm to a series of Utah companies compared to a New England jury. I don't care what the case might be, if I represented an out-of-state company that caused some kind of harm to a Utah company, I wouldn't want to face a Utah jury. I think Caldera has a much stronger case than the litigious Bristol had -- strong enough that Calderda might even have a good chance of winning in New Hampshire if they were based there. But we're talking about Utah. Beyond the facts of the case, Microsoft must hope that their lawyers do a good job of pointing out that DR-DOS was a California product (developed by a Seattle native's company) and that its Utah connections are late and tenuous.