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: hdl who wrote (56336)	2/28/2001 10:42:14 AM
From: 10K a day	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 74651

i don't really think it's about that. I think it's about 100 dollar OEM copies of professional2000 on ebay. I think it's about 80 dollar (full version) copies of ME on ebay. I think it's about Linux Boxes sold on the internet. I think it's about being tired of put in a box. I think it's about proxy server bonking. I think it's about a lot of things....

To: hdl who wrote (56336)	2/28/2001 1:09:53 PM
From: Brian Sullivan	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 74651

Judge Jackson has showed his obvious bias against Microsoft He was not trying to intentionally help Microsoft by make the comments that he made to reporters. You see he has a bit of a Napoleonic complex himself. Because he wanted to bask in the glory of being the judge that could tame Microsoft, he violated his duty to act and appear as an impartial judicator of justice. So he granted interviews with journalists and newspaper reporters well before the end of the case. Taking the journalists back into his judicial chambers where he espoused his peculiar views on Microsoft. He made many disparaging remarks: comparing Microsoft executives to drug dealers, Bill Gates with Napoleon, he criticized the companies lawyers and he also said that he didn't believe in software integration. These interviews occurred in the Fall of 1999 about the time that he issued his finding of a facts. And he even explained to the journalists that his intentions in issuing the Finding of Facts separately was to both force Microsoft to negotiate a settlement (from a position of great weakness) and to thwart the Appeals Court which would have to accepts his Findings of Facts (since the normal practice is only to review cases narrowly; not to retry them). The conditions that he placed upon these journalist was that they would have to keep the interviews secret until after the case was decided. At this point Judge Jackson probably expected to see Microsoft and the government reach a settlement. In November he appointed Judge Posner as a mediator and made heavy handed suggestions that both sides should settle. However since the two sides didn't settle, Judge Jackson's goose was cooked. For you see the statements that the Judge had already made would lead the average citizen to conclude that the judge was heavily biased against Microsoft. You see if the Judge had made these statements in open court he would have been dismissed from the case. The fact that these comments were held in secret interviews and not made known to the defendant would poison any further rulings from this judge (and they have). And his explaination of why he structured the Finding of Facts seperately will lead to their invalidation by the Appeals court.