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: Teflon who wrote (16525)	2/19/1999 5:38:00 PM
From: RTev	Respond to of 74651

T2k and Teflon: I think the risk of follow-on suits is high unless Microsoft scores an unexpected trial-round victory in this suit. The Caldera suit is an example of what is almost sure to happen without a total victory. In that case, Microsoft accepted little more than a slap in the hand after settling a DOJ antitrust suit, but Caldera took aspects of that settlement along with a few other allegations to build an antitrust case that some stories say may seek $1.6 billion in damages. Almost anything short of a win in the fact-trial of the current case will give both AOL/Netscape and Sun standing to file similar claims based on MS actions regarding Navigator and Java. Hardware companies might also want to join in. (I suppose MS could, as an alternative, craft a settlement agreement that somehow precludes future litigation, but probably only by making significant concessions to Sun, Netscape, and others.) These private antitrust actions are both more common and more dangerous. Remember that it was not primarily a government suit, but rather an antitrust suit filed by MCI that finally led to the breakup of AT&T. Oh, and Boies is an attorney in private practice. There's nothing to keep Netscape or Sun from hiring him.

To: Teflon who wrote (16525)	2/19/1999 5:40:00 PM
From: John F. Dowd	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Boise has not proven the case. Oh yes he pointed out the technical flaws in the videos and used internal eMails to show what various people were musing within MSFT but from where I see it he proved no harm to the consumer, in fact thanks to the AOL/NSCP merger he was unable to prove any injury there. As for the contracts MSFT entered into with various other parties he did not point out anything that would indicate that MSFT was restraining trade. In all cases the hardware manufacturer was always allowed to load whatever software they desired but they could not tamper with the MSFT OS. Graet grist for the tecno-tabloids but no violation of the consumer and the matter of tying has already been addressed in a prior overturning of the same Judge Jackson's earlier and erroneous decision. It is not the job of the DOJ to interfere in the market place to divide up markets. When all the noise is removed from this case there is no case. I do agree that MSFT's lawyers were not as prepared for the infighting but they were focused on the principal of the case not the peripheral details. Their lack of attention here provided for some embarrassing moments but these gov't "victories" were pyric and not substantive. JFD