On Sat, Aug 22, 2009 at 08:08, Ben Scott<[email protected]> wrote: > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 7:36 PM, Kurt Buff<[email protected]> wrote: >> I responded to Mr. Scott's little memento - "Microsoft got (and gets) >> in trouble for using its monopoly powers in ways which violate >> anti-trust laws..." >> >> This is political opinion in and of itself ... > > Regarding your own rant: You're advocating how you think the law > *should* be written. I was reporting on how the law is written and > applied -- and under the common law system the US uses, case law *is* > law. You may not agree with the law, you may think it's wholly wrong > and corrupt, but that doesn't mean you, personally and individually, > have the power to overturn it. > > A US court deemed Microsoft to be monopoly, and to have used that > monopoly power to give their web browser uncompetitive advantage. See > US v. MSFT, Findings of Fact, > <http://www.usdoj.gov/atr/cases/f3800/msjudgex.htm>. > > Again: You may not agree. I really don't care, and for purposes of > answering the question I was responding to, what you think doesn't > matter. Feel free to continue to rant, but Kurt Buff's opinions do > not decide law, no matter how much you think they should. > > That's all I'm going to say on the subject.
Then my last word in this thread as well: Jim Crow was the law of the land, too, until people started speaking out against them. Such speech was not much appreciated in many quarters, yet those who loved freedom persisted. I shall persist. Kurt ~ Finally, powerful endpoint security that ISN'T a resource hog! ~ ~ <http://www.sunbeltsoftware.com/Business/VIPRE-Enterprise/> ~
