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: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (22797)	2/27/1999 4:04:00 PM
From: Gerald R. Lampton	Respond to of 24154

Not that it's a huge issue or reversible error or anything, but telling the witness to shut up, that he can't explain his answer, to lose his temper, is not exactly the happening thing for the judge to do. That said, Muglia really should not have carried on. It's bad form. Plus, who knows what he might inadvertently say that might be turned against him. If I were his lawyer, I'd be reading him (and a few others) the riot act right now for this whole God-awful defense -- unless of course they deliberately did it on purpose, in which case I don't know whether to call them geniuses or stark, raving mad. And the judge did say, later on in the testimony, which I excerpt for all to read in my previous post, that Muglia could cover it on redirect if his lawyer wanted. So, the judge is off the hook. This whole thing about the judge blowing up at Muglia is just a sideshow, mainly interesting for how it shows, once again, that the judge has "lost it" with Microsoft and its shenanigans, in and out of the courtroom. Anyone want to make a guess as to who their rebuttal witnesses will be?

To: Lizzie Tudor who wrote (22797)	3/1/1999 1:11:00 PM
From: Charles Hughes	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24154

Typical bit of managerial CYA email prose to me. First you say I absolutely am opposed to this, to your subordinate. Then you say, 'but you can do what you want.' Gets the responsibility off your back, you hope. If they disobey, you know who to start looking to get rid of. I have seen this a thousand times. No wise subordinate ever falls into the trap, unless there is a serious legal conflict involving his/her duties that make it impossible to obey. Go against the flow and end up gone. Might work in testimoney in this case, if everybody didn't know how Gates issues policy instructions at MSFT. It is perfectly clear that there is one opinion that matters at MSFT. Plus there are dozens of other emails, and the public statements of the officers that are on the record, plus the meeting notes of folks they negotiated with. MSFT arguing about all this just makes them look that much more like habituated liars. All this doesn't matter much. MSFT in reality hasn't had much of a defense they could put up, and they didn't. Chaz