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: RTev who wrote (19518)	4/1/1999 8:41:00 PM
From: t2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

RTev, We do see this very differently. If what you have stated is correct, there will not be a settlement. Microsoft has nothing to lose in the rebuttal phase, especially since they will be calling an expert to review the Netscape/AOL merger. This fear may be a reason the DOJ may back down in the way they have been negotiating. As part of the case, I can see AOL's market capitalization being brought into the picture, which is incredible given how young the company is. Netscape before the merger thrived in the competitive environment. Showing harm to consumers is going to be very difficult. My guess is that he's enough of a lawyer to consider the appellate judges who rule against him as fools who don't understand the law, but managed to get themselves into a nice job. If, in the end, he has to make a decision and looks at the facts and the law and determines that Microsoft is liable, then that's what he'll rule -- Appeals Court be damned This judge does care about being overturned in Appeals on the case of his entire career. Other cases he handled don't even come close to this one. He knows that he made errors---ex preparation time for MSFT. Even the limiting of witnesses could be an issue in that he did not allow more. Then we might get the appeals court judges having to decide on a case of their careers. Think about this; If they find that the case could have gone either way, would they not want to overturn Jackson especially if the tying of browser to Windows is the issue. They will do it in a flash!! Everybody wants to feel important.<g> My Conclusion: If the government asks for major concessions, there will not be any settlement. You can bet that MSFT will fire away on AOL/Netscape/Sunw deal. They will try to score enough points before giving the kinds of concession the states are seeking. Only if they are unsuccessful could we see MSFT backing down a little. Their belief is that the law is still on their side. After Jackon's findings, MSFT will show how the anti-trust laws have not been violated. It is generally believed that MSFT has jurisprudence on their side. We know anti-trust laws are to protect the consumer and if they have not been harmed, well there may not be much of a case left.

To: RTev who wrote (19518)	4/1/1999 8:42:00 PM
From: J Krnjeu	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 74651

Mr. RTev, The problem is that new charges of antitrust violations came up almost as soon as the consent decree was signed. Now they're back in court. That statement is not correct. The DOJ had to change their charge against MSFT since the appeals court said MSFT has the right to innovate their product. The original charge was MSFT put IE into their OS with the purpose of putting Netscape out of business. The major part of the DOJ case was based on the integration issue. They had to modified the charge at the last minute or not go forward. The judge allowed the modification to the case. The judge could have allowed MSFT a delay to further prepare their case but refused. The DOJ had really no choice but to change the charge at the last minute. Thank You JK