Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 26th Jan 2009 11:56 UTC
Internet & Networking Earlier this month, news got out that the European Commission is charging Microsoft with unlawful competition regarding its bundling of the Internet Explorer web bowser with Windows. At the time, information was scarce, but thanks to Microsoft's quarterly filing at the Securities and Exchange Commission. we now have a little more insight into what the EU might force Microsoft to do.
Thread beginning with comment 345524
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: How typical
by modmans2ndcoming on Mon 26th Jan 2009 13:13 UTC in reply to "RE: How typical"
modmans2ndcoming
Member since:
2005-11-09

Recall, it was the Bush administration who changed the Government's side on the case and helped MS apeal Jackson's ruling.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: How typical
by kaiwai on Mon 26th Jan 2009 22:57 in reply to "RE[2]: How typical"
kaiwai Member since:
2005-07-06

Recall, it was the Bush administration who changed the Government's side on the case and helped MS apeal Jackson's ruling.


Judge Jackson didn't help the case by spouting his mouth off to the media - and flippant comments like, "Bill Gates as a nepoleonic complex". He should have kept quiet and any questions asked to him should have been replied using the following, "I have not heard all the evidence from both sides of the case, I will reserve any comments till all the evidence is presented and I submit my decision on the matter".

Had he kept his mouth shut - we'd be talking about Microsoft Applications and Microsoft Operating System. Thanks to Judge Jackson spouting his mouth off the Microsoft team had a legitimate argument that the judge had pre-determined the case before all the evidence was provided.

Want someone to blame, blame Judge Jackson for giving Microsoft the tools required to scuttle the case.

Reply Parent Score: 4

RE[4]: How typical
by Moulinneuf on Tue 27th Jan 2009 07:45 in reply to "RE[3]: How typical"
Moulinneuf Member since:
2005-07-06

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft#Settlement

"On November 2, 2001, the DOJ reached an agreement with Microsoft to settle the case."

"Nine states (California, Connecticut, Iowa, Florida, Kansas, Minnesota, Utah, Virginia and Massachusetts) and the District of Columbia (which had been pursuing the case together with the DOJ) did not agree with the settlement, arguing that it did not go far enough to curb Microsoft's anti-competitive business practices."

The US *DOJ* scuttled the case ...

The case was never finished , was never ended following the laws of the US of A , the case was never fully tried.

Why put blame on people , when justice and laws itself where ignored ...

Reply Parent Score: 2