| ActiveMac | Anonymous | Create a User | Reviews | News | Forums | Advertise |
|
|
|
User Controls |
|
New User |
|
Login |
|
Edit/View My Profile |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ActiveMac |
|
Articles |
|
Forums |
|
Links |
|
News |
|
News Search |
|
Reviews |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
News Centers |
|
Windows/Microsoft |
|
DVD |
|
ActiveHardware |
|
Xbox |
|
MaINTosh |
|
News Search |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
ANet Chats |
|
The Lobby |
|
Special Events Room |
|
Developer's Lounge |
|
XBox Chat |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
FAQ's |
|
Windows 98/98 SE |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Windows Me |
|
Windows "Whistler" XP |
|
Windows CE |
|
Internet Explorer 6 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Xbox |
|
DirectX |
|
DVD's |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
TopTechTips |
|
Registry Tips |
|
Windows 95/98 |
|
Windows 2000 |
|
Internet Explorer 4 |
|
Internet Explorer 5 |
|
Windows NT Tips |
|
Program Tips |
|
Easter Eggs |
|
Hardware |
|
DVD |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Latest Reviews |
|
Applications |
|
Microsoft Windows XP Professional |
|
Norton SystemWorks 2002 |
|
|
|
Hardware |
|
Intel Personal Audio Player 3000 |
|
Microsoft Wireless IntelliMouse Explorer |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site News/Info |
|
About This Site |
|
Affiliates |
|
ANet Forums |
|
Contact Us |
|
Default Home Page |
|
Link To Us |
|
Links |
|
Member Pages |
|
Site Search |
|
Awards |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Credits |
 |
Judge Backs All of Microsoft Settlement-Sources | |
|
||
| Time: 16:42 EST/21:42 GMT | News Source: Reuters | Posted By: Byron Hinson | ||
|
A federal judge on Friday endorsed all of the antitrust settlement that Microsoft Corp. reached with the Justice Department last year, sources familiar with the ruling said. The sources said U.S. District Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly had rejected the alternative demands of nine states opposed to the settlement. An appeals court in June of 2001 upheld trial court findings that Microsoft had illegally maintained its Windows monopoly in personal computer operating systems. There was no immediate word on whether the nine states, which had rejected the settlement of the over four-year-old case as ineffective, would appeal Kollar-Kotelly's decision.
| ||
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 322 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
3:54:25 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
| #26 By 3339 (64.175.43.189) at 11/1/2002 11:35:30 PM |
| mooresa, that's not optimism--I see this as pessimism. That this is going to keep going on and on and on. The fact is the Inquirer piece a couple days ago was a fantastic piece... Maybe you find it's evidence or wording questionable, but the sentiment is dead on... There are plenty of people who wish Microsoft would just behave like a normal company rather than exploiting every opportunity, advantage, and billion they have... We actually want to go back to having objective opinions about them rather than having to take essentially a "political" stance against them because of their methods. I don't think it's over by a long shot--on both sides. And despite what soda believes I certainly don't want Microsoft destroyed--but I think that even some of you softies would say that Microsoft will never change it's ways; (some of you might encourage they never change, I'm sure). That's not optimism, trust me. That's dread. And yes, I'm willing to accept the decision, and I do legitimately believe there can be advantage in this case being over--maybe you think that's too optimistic, I don't care--because it certainly isn't over, and this really doesn't change my position much either. I was criticizing Microsoft, afterall, in the early nineties, hell, even earlier... I don't need an American Federal court case to motivate the creation or destruction of my thoughts and positions. |
| #27 By 3653 (65.190.70.73) at 11/1/2002 11:36:20 PM |
|
Just look at the harm that this ridiculous case has caused...
The breakup ruling was issued the first week of June, 2000. Take a look at nasdaq since then... http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=^IXIC&d=c&k=c1&a=v&p=m50,m200,s&t=4y&l=on&z=m&q=l I'm no fool. I know its not that simple, but damn... you have to admit that is odd. |
| #28 By 2332 (65.221.182.3) at 11/2/2002 12:16:51 AM |
|
#37 - Actually, Sodajerk, you claimed I was wrong because the judge issued a findings of fact, and therefore my facts were incorrect.
I responded by saying that a judge's opinion may be fact in the eyes of the law, but it doesn't make it the truth, nor does it make it right. I took issue with both the application of existing laws, and the laws themselves. You didn't seem to think I was entitled to this opinion because, again, there was a court ruling the other way. Well, now a court has ruled "my way" in nearly every instance. So, using your logic, your arguments are now null and void. Have a nice day. |
|
Write Comment
Return to News |
Displaying 26 through 50 of 322 Prev | Last | Next |
The time now is
3:54:25 PM
ET.
Any comment problems? E-mail us |
