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 : MSFT Internet Explorer vs. NSCP Navigator -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Harvey Allen who wrote (24112)	8/17/2001 2:01:12 PM
From: Win Smith	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Hi Harvey, I meant to post something last week when Bill filed his whine with the SC, but it's hard to work up the energy anymore. The PC business as a whole seems to be in such a slump, I don't know what will do it any good. Oh yeah, WinXP and mandatory product activation, that's the ticket. Looking back, I think Jackson got sick of it all too, that's why he rubber stamped the DoJ breakup plan. He just didn't want to go through months more of Microsoft lawyers lying to his face and saying "nyah, nyah, we'll win on appeal". It sure looks like they didn't exactly win on appeal.

To: Harvey Allen who wrote (24112)	8/17/2001 3:50:31 PM
From: Win Smith	Respond to of 24154

Shoot, I forgot to check today's news before I wrote the last message. Here's an article with today's rebuff for Bill & Co., along with sidebar links to recent stories. Court Denies Microsoft's Bid to Delay Antitrust Case nytimes.com In a one-paragraph order issued this morning, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia said Microsoft had failed to demonstrate that it would suffer any substantial harm if the case were to go forward. The appeals court also took a swipe at Microsoft for arguing before the Supreme Court that the decision should be vacated in its entirety because the trial judge, Thomas Penfield Jackson, had violated a Federal ethics law by making derogatory comments about the company. "It appears that Microsoft has misconstrued our opinion, particularly with respect to what would have been required to justify vacating the district court's findings of fact and conclusions of law as a remedy of the violation" of the ethics law by Judge Jackson, the appeals court said. "We need not decide, however, whether Microsoft's objections constitute a `substantial question' likely to lead to Supreme Court review, because Microsoft has failed to demonstrate any substantial harm that would result from the reactivation of the proceeding in the district court." The judges directed the court clerk to issue a mandate in seven days, formalizing the order and prompting the random selection of a new district court judge later this month. Predictably, officials at the Justice Department praised today's decision, while company executives said it was wrong. It's just not fair, says Bill.