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: Kashish King who wrote (46932)	6/17/2000 12:40:00 PM
From: Michael L. Voorhees	Respond to of 74651

All MSFT shareholders get to support "Billy Big Bucks" ongoing temper tantrum because he's not getting what he wants. Geez, on the CBS interview this guy started balling because he doesn't like going to work as much as he used to. I guess we should just repeal antitrust laws so he gets what he wants. Grow Up.

To: Kashish King who wrote (46932)	6/17/2000 1:13:00 PM
From: Michael L. Voorhees	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

Microsoft problems mount By Richard Wolffe in Washington from financialtimes.com Published: June 16 2000 00:11GMT \| Last Updated: June 16 2000 15:56GMT Microsoft's legal battles intensified on Thursday as lawyers filed an expanded lawsuit in the US, bringing together 170 separate cases on behalf of consumers against the world's largest software company. The class action lawsuit, filed in Maryland on behalf of millions of Microsoft customers, sues the company for allegedly eliminating competition from superior and cheaper rivals in all its main software markets. The lawyers are seeking to recover financial damages inflicted on Microsoft's customers, as well as three times any amount awarded in punitive damages under antitrust law. They estimate the total damages could rise to "billions of dollars". Class action lawyers across the US have leapt into litigation following Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson's first rulings, last November, against Microsoft in the government's landmark antitrust case against the company. Microsoft's lawyers have previously dismissed the class action lawsuits as opportunistic and without legal foundation. The expanded lawsuit filed on Thursday broadens the scope of earlier class actions that have been filed since last November by extending them beyond Microsoft's Windows operating software. The litigation now seeks damages for over-charging and lost competition for popular applications such as word processing, financial spreadsheets and the Office business suite of software. It claims damages for US and international customers who purchased Microsoft's products inside the US. Citing Judge Jackson's factual findings, it claims Microsoft over-charged for Windows by $40 a copy. While the lawsuit echoes much of the government's to-date successful case against Microsoft, the lawyers also extend the allegations of anticompetitive conduct back to 1988.

To: Kashish King who wrote (46932)	6/18/2000 1:33:00 AM
From: Thunder	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

So tell us what fraction of that might have been exposed had there been an agreed upon settlement, up to and including no admission of guilt? Strike that, what portion of that do you content would have been sued for in the event Microsoft was deemed guilty? Who really knows for sure, we could conjecture & debate this until both of us were blue in the hands, just to run full circle. What I am assured of is that Bill Gates & Steve Ballmer are/were far more aware of the details (and possible threat) of a crippling settlement proposal at hand better than you or myself, and thus chose to continue their defense. Having said that, it is also my belief they would have been far more inclined to settle awhile ago if the DOJ (to a greater extent the few state AG's) wasn't so hell bent on positioning Microsoft into oblivion. It's a sad mistake to think that Microsoft is fighting this out of mundane arrogance or entertainment value over shareholder value. Despite the popular thought, it's not a game. Having done that, please explain how your case is helped by a lengthy, carful legal process that concludes by stipulating that Microsoft has in fact* been violating the law.* The word "concludes" is defined largely by closure, end, and finality. We are not there as of yet. When we do arrive there, everyone will know it, and may reflect in retrospect quite differently then, as they do now. It's monumentally important to be reminded that "my case" as you refer to, is not just mine but everyone else as well; this defense represents far more than just U.S. vs Microsoft. The resolve of this case will set the precedent of our future regarding anti-trust, at least in the short term. For crying out loud Gary, go tell your fairy tales to somebody else. Be patient Rod, soon the Judiciaries of a Higher Court(s) will reveal just which side has willfully attempted to espouse Sherman with their heartfelt, self serving, extortionary agenda in the name of the consumer. How much more speciously ironic can it be. Cordially, Gary