4 ms·
Didn’t Microsoft win that case?
by whynotminot 3y ago
Didn’t Microsoft win that case?
- lapcat 3y agoNo.
- whynotminot 3y agoYes?
- lapcat 3y agoYou could read Wikipedia rather than asking on HN: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Corp https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_v._Microsoft_Cor....
- whynotminot 3y agolol I did, which is why I replied skeptically because it says Microsoft had most of it overturned on appeal.
- lapcat 3y agoDid you read the part that said, "The case was remanded back to the D.C. District Court for further proceedings on this matter, with Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly presiding." That's not a win. The case was ongoing, and likely would have gone to the Supreme Court eventually, though the court was too cowardly to take the case immediately. There was a settlement with the DoJ. You don't settle when you win and the other side loses.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agosure you do, it's a question of the cost.
- lapcat 3y agoThe cost of... what?
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agoI'm not going to answer that question in any serious way as the answer is extremely obvious. Instead I'm going to ask you a question. Do you suspect that lawyers work for free?
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]
- lapcat 3y agoIt seems that you're very confused. The OP claimed, mistakenly, that Microsoft won the case. They did not. When two parties settle a case, there is no winner or loser, and the case isn't decided by a judge or jury. The DoJ and Microsoft settled the case. There was no winner or loser. If Microsoft had won the case, then the notion of settlement doesn't even make sense. And depending on the law and jurisdiction, legal fees can be awarded to the winner of a case. But with a settlement, one party doesn't usually pay the other party's legal expenses as a stipulation; that would be weird. So I really don't know what in the world you're talking about, and maybe you don't either. The question here is a simple factual one: Did Microsoft win the case? No, they did not. The OP's assertion was wrong. You seem to be contemplating a different question, namely, does it make sense for parties to settle before going to judgement, which is why you think the answer is "extremely obvious". And of course it makes sense to settle, which is precisely what Microsoft and the DoJ did. They settled. Microsoft did not win. When you win, you don't settle. And the issue of legal expenses is irrelevant to the question of whether Microsoft won or not.
- PH95VuimJjqBqy 3y agonot so much confused as I understand English. Another definition for win is to achieve victory. The bells got split up, MS settled with the DOJ and got a small slap on the wrist. The other poster considers that a victory (as do most people).