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: Daniel Schuh who wrote (19655)	5/22/1998 12:06:00 AM
From: Daniel Schuh	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 24154

Did MS execs document their legal missteps? zdnet.com Nah, Microsoft has done nothing wrong. Just ask Reggie. The key issue, according to John Briggs, past chairman of the American Bar Association's antitrust law section, is that some of the statements appear to indicate the company would try to "maintain its operating system monopoly by cutting off (consumers') access to browsers that could potentially, in the future, replace the OS." Attempts to maintain a monopoly in a certain market by blocking competitors' access to that market are clearly illegal under U.S. antitrust laws, said Briggs, a partner at the Washington law firm Howrey & Simon. "This is a much more crucial issue than the browser integration question" which has been the focus of many press reports on Microsoft's antitrust woes, he said. But Briggs added that while the documents contain "colorful" statements, he said, "They don't amount to a slam-dunk for Justice." So, I'm sure we'll be hearing some interesting explanations about how these things are all taken out of context, and stuff like that. After all, Microsoft must be free to innovate on the legal front too. That's their right. One more quick quote for the road, on my old favorite subject: Referring to Maritz's comment about blunting Java momentum, Gray said, "That's a devastating Sherman Act claim. It shows that they are trying to protect themselves from competition from an upstart technology." Just standard Microsoft business practice, of course. Remember when Urowsky brought up the Sherman act in the original consent decree hearings? Maybe he should have went with the "Bill Gates is John Galt" line. Cheers, Dan.