Slashdot Mirror
Jackson Sends Microsoft Case To Supreme Court
[Xorian] us a coverage on c|net
(and here's a AP story on Yahoo) saying that Jackson has referred the Microsoft Case to the Supreme Court, skipping the appellate courts. 'Course, the Supreme Court doesn't have to take it if they don't want it, and since it's close to the end of the term, they might not get to it this term even if they did take it.
I'm seriously interested in whether there is a website, or something that allows gambling on the outcome of all of this.
Yes, it's called E-Trade
The regular
For all intensive purposes, "whom" is no longer a word. That begs the question, "who cares"?
I am going to play devils advocate for this one.
The Appellate court may have sided with MS in the previous ruling by Judge Jackson against MS, but that does not necessarily mean that they are firmly in MS's pocket. There are some key points as to why I believe that they are not.
1) They have decided to see this one En Blanc, unlike the previous two trials. But three of the Judges have been disqualified from sitting on the case due to conflict of interest. They are obviously trying to show that they are taking this case with the utmost seriousness.
2) That seriousness was also shown in their haste to accept the trial. As soon as MS had submitted their request for appeal the case was accepted, no waiting at all. They were expecting this, and have obviously started getting ready for the apeal.
3) Most of the Justices were appointed during the Reagan era. Now most would say that this would help MS, but it actually hurts them. Although they are conservative judges who most likely want to help big business, they also know that monopolies hurt business and hurt the economy and therefore are more likely to side against a monopoly.
Perhaps in the previous two appeals they didn't feel that the case was strong enough, or the punishment severe enough. Perhaps they have been waiting for MS to even more blatently abuse its power so that when it gets caught they can rule for a harsher penelty then what had been submitted before. Perhaps not, perhaps they will continue to side with MS. I'm just speculating here.
If one goes by the rulings from the previous cases then it seems obvious that they will rule in favor of MS, but that does not necessarily mean that they will. This isn't just about integrating IE into Windows anymore, this is much bigger and will have a much larger impact on the economy then the previous cases. The Justices have obviously been following the case, they know how MS acted throughout the trial. Not just one or two Justices but all of them, and they are informed enough to stop 3 of them from sitting due to conflict on interest. If they follow their conservative background then they will rule in favor of the economy, which is against MS.
We also may never know how they would rule if the Supreme Court takes it.
Only time will tell at this point.
Disclamer - Opinion of Person
Jackson's opinions have, as I suspect for many people, reaffirmed my own faith in the intelligence, circumspectness, and wisdom of the judiciary. But of course that's not a universal condition.
But does anyone know what the connection is? Why does the Appellate in this circumstance seem so firmly in MSFT's pocket?
We're on the road to Tycho.
While I agree about 50% of the time with their decisions, their explanations are screwed up.
Since generally about 50% of people will agree with the Supreme Court in any given case, I propose that this costly organisation is replaced by a coin which is tossed on any controversial issue. This will reduce costs dramatically, with a maximum initial setup cost of 25 cents.