SI
SI
discoversearch

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: SC who wrote (38553)2/25/2000 2:38:00 PM
From: Harvey Allen  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 74651
 
SC- Obscure Law May Complicate Microsoft Appeal

If the company does appeal, a little known law called the Antitrust Expediting
Act, which applies to antitrust actions brought by the U.S. government, will
cause the defense some problems.

The Expediting Act will allow the Justice Department to seek immediate
review at the U.S. Supreme Court, vaulting over sympathetic judges from the
federal appeals court in Washington, D.C., who ruled in Microsoft's favor in
June 1998. That ruling used stark language to proclaim that courts should not
get into the business of designing software.

nylj.com



To: SC who wrote (38553)2/25/2000 2:39:00 PM
From: johnd  Respond to of 74651
 
DOW, MSFT are in oversold territory, imo.



To: SC who wrote (38553)2/25/2000 2:51:00 PM
From: Bill Fischofer  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 74651
 
Re: Expidited appeals

Assuming TPJ finds against MSFT it is certain that MSFT will appeal the decision. At that point, in theory, DoJ could petition the Supreme Court to hear the case directly. The key however is that the Supreme Court is an independent branch of government and has absolute discretion in this matter. DoJ can ask all they want but the Supremes will do whatever they want.

My personal view is that an expedited appeal is very unlikely. It is obvious why DoJ would want to go this route since the clock is clearly on MSFT's side. With each passing month the relevancy of the 'issues' in the case continue to erode and we get a month closer to the November elections and a possible new administration which may be less zealous in its desire to hobble a US national asset. However the Supreme Court is the ultimate guardian of the judicial system and its tradition of due process and would only interfere under conditions of compelling national interest. Whatever one's position on the case it is hard to argue that allowing it to drag through the courts for another year or two would somehow imperil the nation.