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.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mani1 who wrote (108750)	5/1/2000 1:06:00 AM
From: TimF	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 1572154

You are saying that Microsft was never declared a monopoly and that is the fact? Jodge Jackson indeed declared Miscrosoft a Monopoly! Mani, the potentially illegal actions of Microsoft happened before Judge Jackson made this declaration. I think Jozef's point was since MS was not a declared monopoly at the time that it commited this actions, then it should not be liable to punishment because of them, unless they are illegal even for non monopolies. Tim

To: Mani1 who wrote (108750)	5/1/2000 1:14:00 AM
From: Joe NYC	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1572154

Main, You are saying that Microsft was never declared a monopoly and that is the fact? Jodge Jackson indeed declared Miscrosoft a Monopoly! It is very clear that you have not followed this case at all and I no longer want to argue this with you. I am following the case. If the judge's ruling stands, than starting now, Microsoft will in fact have to abide by the monololy rules. But I don't see how they can be prosecuted not obeying monopoly rules before the time of the ruling. Joe