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 : Intel Corporation (INTC) -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: t2 who wrote (75856)	3/9/1999 8:15:00 AM
From: gnuman	Respond to of 186894

Wash Post, "Intel, Microsoft Take Unlike Paths on Suits" May be a good thing Microsoft went first. <In its legal battle with the Justice Department and 19 states, Microsoft has refused to cede an inch – no matter what the fallout. In negotiations before the suit was filed, the company indicated to government lawyers that it would be unwilling to make any significant changes to its dominant Windows operating system, the software at the center of the dispute. As its trial began, Microsoft refused to apologize for the sometimes-tough language its employees have used in internal electronic mail messages to describe competitors, telling the judge hearing the case that "the antitrust laws are not a code of civility in American business." That brash attitude, on a few occasions, appears to have irritated the federal judge hearing the case and has led to a spate of negative publicity outside the courtroom. And because the government has expanded its case from a narrow dispute over Internet browsers to a broad assault on the company's business practices, Microsoft also could face the prospect of aggressive sanctions – such as a corporate breakup or a forced disclosure of the computer code that makes up its Windows software – should it lose. Those are risks, it appears, Intel did not want to take................. "The Microsoft trial has taught us how unpredictable and dangerous trials are, particularly in the way they provide a forum for reviewing the innermost details of a company's decision-making and potentially rupturing relationships with customers and other important industry participants," said William E. Kovacic, a former FTC lawyer who now is a law professor at George Washington University. "In the Intel case, they presumably made a judgment they could live with some of what the FTC wanted," said Robert Litan, a former Justice antitrust official who now is the director of economic studies at the Brookings Institution. "It wasn't worth exposing their dirty laundry to America."> washingtonpost.com