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: The Duke of URL© who wrote (51936)	10/21/2000 1:30:18 PM
From: JC Jaros	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74651

Yeah, actually, I was refering to an earlier consent decree. --- Speaking of Michael Milkin, now *there's a guy who knows about the state of the software biz (SEVL -defunct). -JCJ

To: The Duke of URL© who wrote (51936)	10/21/2000 3:22:59 PM
From: Dave	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

"That is incorrect, the previous consent decree is directly applicable. That is how Win98 got released. Jackson wanted to enjoin it. That motion went directly to the C/A and the Court ruled that the consent decree APPLIED and that the integration of IE in 98 was allowed." I don't think that's true. I read the Appeals Court decision, and if I recall correctly, they overturned Jackson's preliminary injunction, which was to prevent MSFT from shipping W98 until IE was stripped from it. They did NOT say, as so many have misquoted, that IE was ALLOWED in W98. They merely said that the preliminary injunction was not justified, and that the case should in fact go to court. Dave

To: The Duke of URL© who wrote (51936)	10/21/2000 7:34:44 PM
From: Charles Tutt	Respond to of 74651

Come on, now. Surely even you don't believe all that? The "Federal Banks" (who are THEY, anyway?) conspired to have Milken sent to jail to get him out of the way? Hogwash. JMHO. Charles Tutt (TM)