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: saukriver who wrote (41018)	4/4/2000 8:18:00 AM
From: John F. Dowd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

saukriver: Good point on the findings of fact. But there was no way that Jackson was going to let this opportunity slide after having been defeated the first time in the matter of browser inclusion in Windows 95. In fact this case became a random witch hunt with the only evidence being supplied being the gleanings from MSFT memos and the pencil notes of the their accusers. I am sure the Appeals Court will find many ways to dismiss this whole thing even though Jackson has tried to render the most permanent harm he can through his bogus "findings of fact". A brief perusal of the transcripts reveals this whole trial to be no more than an inquisition that might have conducted at the Lubyanka or by the Grand Inquisitor. The findings of fact will be thrown out as they are speculative and show no real and current harm to consumers. In fact the contrary would have to be the only truthful conclusion. This was a spiteful tirade carried into the courtroom by a jurist that should have recused himself but chose rather to be the assistant prosecutor instead. I look next for this "judge" to start granting pre appeal injunctive relief and other spiteful little lashes before he gets overturned. JFD