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: RTev who wrote (32658)	11/7/1999 3:43:00 PM
From: John F. Dowd	Respond to of 74651

RTev: .The violation on which this case is based was egregious. Klein's division expanded suit into a broader case than what would have been filed by a less activist AG's office, but it almost needed to file some kind of case. What egregious violation. Accusations by competitors and no harm to consumers. They switched gears in the middle of the trial as they saw that the IE5.0/Windows 98 thing was going no where. JFD

To: RTev who wrote (32658)	11/7/1999 3:56:00 PM
From: RTev	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Another point about Slade Gorton. I don't mean to suggest that what he says is merely political expediency. Gorton is a very good antitrust lawyer. In the 70s, when he was the state AG in Washington, Gorton filed and won an antitrust suit against Major League Baseball. They were forced to bring the Mariners to Seattle as a result of that suit, but also forced to get special antitrust protection from Congress. When he was first in the Senate, Gorton battled his fellow Republicans on the issue of the ideology test that the Reagan administration used to appoint so many judges, including Jackson. Gorton was willing to expend considerable political capital to get a lawyer in Seattle named to the federal court. Gorton knew he would be a very good jurist, even though he was decidedly liberal. All of that is to say that his comments on the case are well grounded, even though he grossly underestimated the abilities of Judge Jackson. And what does he think is likely to happen in the future? "I don't think there's much risk going to an appeal," he told The Seattle Times. "Given the one-sided nature of these findings, any kind of reasonable settlement will be difficult." seattletimes.com