5 ms·

It seems a fairly accurate summary. DoJ was unlikely to win the appeal, so they settled. As a side not, that Wikipedia article is far from neutral: > … Microso

by harles 5y ago

It seems a fairly accurate summary. DoJ was unlikely to win the appeal, so they settled. As a side not, that Wikipedia article is far from neutral: > … Microsoft responded that the company would offer manufacturers a choice: one version of Windows that was obsolete, or another that did not work properly.

mdoms 5y ago
The GP claimed "Microsoft didn't lose any lawsuit in the US for for tying its web browser to Windows". This is absolutely false. From the Wikipedia link, > Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson issued his findings of fact on November 5, 1999, which stated that Microsoft's dominance of the x86-based personal computer operating systems market constituted a monopoly, and that Microsoft had taken actions to crush threats to that monopoly, including Apple, Java, Netscape, Lotus Software, RealNetworks, Linux, and others.[5] Judgment was split in two parts. On April 3, 2000, he issued his conclusions of law, according to which Microsoft had committed monopolization, attempted monopolization, and tying in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.[17] Microsoft immediately appealed the decision.[18] The government may have agreed to a settlement on appeal but Microsoft lost the initial suit.
- nodamage 5y ago
  You seem to be unaware that the tying claims in the Microsoft case were specifically overturned by the appeals court.
  - dahfizz 5y ago
    Overturned by the appeals court. The reason Microsoft appealed is because they lost the lawsuit, and then settled on appeal. The claim in question: > "Microsoft didn't lose any lawsuit in the US for for tying its web browser to Windows" is false.
    - nodamage 5y ago
      If you want to be pedantic, yes, the district court did indeed rule against Microsoft with regards to the tying claim. However, when most people discuss the result of a lawsuit you can generally infer they are referring to the ultimate decision after all appeals are exhausted (as opposed to any particular intermediate decision which could get reversed and then reversed again). Since the appeals court overturned that particular claim, one could reasonably argue that the district judge ruled incorrectly, and in the eyes of the legal system Microsoft, did not, actually lose. (Note that I am speaking here only in regards to the tying claim, as the appeals court did affirm that Microsoft lost on several of the other claims related to Windows licensing for OEMs.)
      - sokoloff 5y ago
        It seems weird to consider any other interpretation, to be honest. Suppose B was accused of murder, initially convicted, then exonerated on appeal. “B is a convicted murderer; true or false?” “B was convicted of murder; true or false?” If your answers are “false to the first but true to the second”, I’d wager you are frequently misunderstood by other people in conversations.
        dahfizz 5y ago
        It makes sense to talk about verdicts when comparing cases, as is the context here. "X was convicted for doing Y, but Z was not convicted for doing >>Y" is an interesting comparison, even if (or especially if) X later won an appeal.

by harles 5y ago

mdoms 5y ago

The GP claimed "Microsoft didn't lose any lawsuit in the US for for tying its web browser to Windows". This is absolutely false. From the Wikipedia link, > Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson issued his findings of fact on November 5, 1999, which stated that Microsoft's dominance of the x86-based personal computer operating systems market constituted a monopoly, and that Microsoft had taken actions to crush threats to that monopoly, including Apple, Java, Netscape, Lotus Software, RealNetworks, Linux, and others.[5] Judgment was split in two parts. On April 3, 2000, he issued his conclusions of law, according to which Microsoft had committed monopolization, attempted monopolization, and tying in violation of Sections 1 and 2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act.[17] Microsoft immediately appealed the decision.[18] The government may have agreed to a settlement on appeal but Microsoft lost the initial suit.

nodamage 5y ago
You seem to be unaware that the tying claims in the Microsoft case were specifically overturned by the appeals court.
- dahfizz 5y ago
  Overturned by the appeals court. The reason Microsoft appealed is because they lost the lawsuit, and then settled on appeal. The claim in question: > "Microsoft didn't lose any lawsuit in the US for for tying its web browser to Windows" is false.
  - nodamage 5y ago
    If you want to be pedantic, yes, the district court did indeed rule against Microsoft with regards to the tying claim. However, when most people discuss the result of a lawsuit you can generally infer they are referring to the ultimate decision after all appeals are exhausted (as opposed to any particular intermediate decision which could get reversed and then reversed again). Since the appeals court overturned that particular claim, one could reasonably argue that the district judge ruled incorrectly, and in the eyes of the legal system Microsoft, did not, actually lose. (Note that I am speaking here only in regards to the tying claim, as the appeals court did affirm that Microsoft lost on several of the other claims related to Windows licensing for OEMs.)
    - sokoloff 5y ago
      It seems weird to consider any other interpretation, to be honest. Suppose B was accused of murder, initially convicted, then exonerated on appeal. “B is a convicted murderer; true or false?” “B was convicted of murder; true or false?” If your answers are “false to the first but true to the second”, I’d wager you are frequently misunderstood by other people in conversations.
      - dahfizz 5y ago
        It makes sense to talk about verdicts when comparing cases, as is the context here. "X was convicted for doing Y, but Z was not convicted for doing >>Y" is an interesting comparison, even if (or especially if) X later won an appeal.