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 : All About Sun Microsystems -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: David Kelly who wrote (28274)	2/24/2000 9:04:00 PM
From: JC Jaros	Respond to of 64865

You're saying that the US should confiscate W2K under the RICO (rackateering) act? Doesn't Copyright law supercede that? :) -JCJ

To: David Kelly who wrote (28274)	2/24/2000 10:42:00 PM
From: rudedog	Respond to of 64865

David - I agree with your statement that the remedies need to address the results of the business practices. But the legal arguments so far have been pretty specifically focused. I have always found the mechanics of the law frustrating, they spend more time defining the rules of engagement than "seeking the truth", and this case was no exception. I am hardly a defender of MSFT's business practices. They pushed well beyond the edge of the envelope... I was commenting specifically on the notion of releasing source code, which has only been discussed in regard to the consumer space, and only with Widows9X... Your argument is interesting but I have not heard it suggested by anyone in the DOJ or states team. I'm not a lawyer so I don't know whether it is legally sound or not... we should see more when the trial enters its next phase.