On Thu, 8 Jun 2000, Jeffry Smith wrote:
> They are hoping to get a sympathetic panel. See above, plus the new panel
> will have the full trial testimony available.
<IANAL>
Actually, I think Microsoft is hoping to delay things as much as possible,
to buy time for something else: For the past six months, Microsoft has been
pouring money into Washington, DC, like it was water. They've gone from being
more-or-less politically apathetic to being one of the most active companies
in the lobby area. It is fairly obvious to anyone what they are trying to do:
Microsoft broke the law. They have been caught. So, they are paying to
have the law changed.
Fifty billion dollars buys a lot of congressmen.
Don't forget, too, that we've got a lot of Republicans in office right now,
and thanks to Bill "Screw Around" Clinton, the Democrats have likely lost the
White House, too. And Republicans have never been great fans of anti-trust
law.
I'll bet anyone a nickel that, by the time the case gets to the supreme
court, the law will have changed and MS will no longer be guilty.
> Some commentors have stated that they perposefully antagonized him to make
> him rule against them, hoping to overturn on appeal on the grounds that
> the was prejudiced. However, in watching this trial, Judge Jackson seemed
> to keep giving them a lot of leeway (he didn't even threaten perjury for
> the faked videotape).
It has been observed that Jackson has been *extremely* forgiving in this
department, and many have theorized he is well aware of this possible
strategy, and took pains to not give MSFT any chance.
Also, one of the lawyers interviewed on Slashdot awhile back has this to say
about the false evidence and other slick MSFT tactics (quoting from memory):
"It is drilled into you in law school that Very Bad Things Will Happen If
You Try To Get Cute With The Judge."
So, apparently, you don't so much get held in contempt of court as you
simply lose your case. Thus, Microsoft's behavior is about the worst thing
they could have done. They tried to play the US Court System as a bunch of
fools. They have effectively stated, in public, that the US Court System has
no business telling them what to do, and doesn't know enough to do so anyway.
If you were a judge, even an appeals judge who dislikes anti-trust action,
how would *you* feel if someone claimed that you (and your entire profession)
were an ignorant outsider with nothing good to contribute?
Not a good way to make friends.
</IANAL>
--
Ben Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Net Technologies, Inc. <http://www.ntisys.com>
Voice: (800)905-3049 x18 Fax: (978)499-7839
**********************************************************
To unsubscribe from this list, send mail to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] with the following text in the
*body* (*not* the subject line) of the letter:
unsubscribe gnhlug
**********************************************************
