25 More States Oppose MSFT Antitrust Dismissal

phebz23 writes "News.com is reporting that 25 more states (even Washington!) are rallying behind the previous 9 to prevent Judge Kollar-Kotelly from dismissing the case on the grounds that the states should not have say in antitrust policy which is opposite of Microsoft's motion. They cite the Clayton Act, which grants them the authority to continue the case." Important to note that the states say: "even when the federal government has proposed to settle a case. Congress has granted the states clear authority to proceed independently under Section 16, despite the fact that the federal government has chosen not to act, has proposed to settle a case, has in fact settled a case, or has taken the matter to trial."

Comments

Well don't we know the whole story

[Rock 'N' Troll]

Micrsofto ownz that Linucz crap bitches! LOL

cordless phones affected?

[edrugtrader]

what about 2.4ghtz cordless phones and x10 wireless stuff?

Re:cordless phones affected?

[edrugtrader]

ummm....... wasn't this story about satelite radio 10 seconds ago?

... note to self: stop smoking crack at work.

Slashdot.org is dying

[Anonymous Coward]

REPORT: Slashdot.org is dying

Re:Slashdot.org is dying

[Anonymous Coward]

Well.. sad .. i read that on CNET 1 hour ago... maybe its all that internet traffik =p

first post

[Anonymous Coward]

woohooo!!!!

hello

[Anonymous Coward]

linx version 6.0 available NOW!!!!!!!!!!1

Way off topic

[ektor]

Killed/Injured Israel 286/1024 Palestine 1125/20,000+

What's that supposed to mean? That Israel are the bad guys?

To any intelligent person it would mean only one thing: that the palestinians can't kill as many people as they'd like to. They don't have any means of killing israelis other than going inside a bar and blowing themselves up and in fact that's what they do.

On the other hand, Israel has nuclear weapons, which they have chosen not to use. What do you think the palestinians would do with nuclear weapons?

Who are the bad guys now?

Re:Way off topic

[castro1959]

What's that supposed to mean? That Israel are the bad guys?

the isreali's moved in on palestian land and i the rest of the world helped them. what to you expect the palestians to do? bend over and take it up the arse. the palestians have no hope against the isrealis in an all out conflict. that's is why that have to turn to the tactics that they do.

On the other hand, Israel has nuclear weapons, which they have chosen not to use. What do you think the palestinians would do with nuclear weapons?

do you think it would be wise to detonate nuclear devices so close to your home country?

Re:Way off topic

[Stonehand]

As a _Newsweek_ columnist said, one of his Arab acquaintances had been talking to some Arab students, and one of them -- apparently out of the blue -- commented that with several nuclear weapons, they could end the Jewish problem. None of the students seemed to think that this was a particularly outrageous statement.

Re:Way off topic

[Anonymous Coward]

You have no idea, do you? Travel to the country, speak to it's people, both sides. The palestinian terror acts are acts of protest. The war they are waging is a defensive one. There is no expansionism involved, and, by the seven gods, no attempts to annihiliate the Israelian people as a whole. Atrocities are commited on both sides, but there are few wars where one of the sides manage to kill thousands of soldiers in a 'good-guy' manner. Perhaps you would care to detail exactly how that could be done?

And no, no palestinian would launch a nuclear weapon and destroy the land they are fighting for. That must be the most wayward and ridiculous political conclusion I have ever heard. Dimensions of thoughtlessness and ignorance lies behind an observation like that. You might just have forfeited your rights of existance, through sheer stupidity. Why do you bother to speak at all?

Re:Way off topic

[Chris Burke]

That's interesting. My first question would be, exactly what does he mean by "None of the students seemed to think that this was a particularly outrageous statement." Did all of the students speak up saying "Yes, I believe that is a good idea"? Or was it silence, as in none were willing to speak against the idea? Or was it a mix, with some saying they agreed and the others simply not disagreeing? Or was it that no one wanted the nuke-happy bastard to know that they though he was a fucking lunatic (and thus some kind of "Jew-lover").

I read Newsweek regularly, I know that many of their reporters wouldn't bother to actually make a distinction between any of the above cases. They frequently summarize events with an emotional interpretation without providing the details necessary to see if they are being accurate. Without the information necessary to detect any bias, you basically have to ignore statements like that. The only thing I would actually believe is that one student suggested nukes. Which I wouldn't consider noteworthy, considering how many idiots got actual -airtime- in this country to talk about their desire to use nukes against Afghanistan.

Re:Way off topic

[GSloop]

Just like Isreal (or at least Sharone) want to get rid of all palestinians.

Cheers!

Re:Way off topic

[GSloop]

Thanks! A voice of sanity coming out of the dark.

I think I heard a bit about this on NPR on Friday - it sounds very interesting.

The first step to systematically destroying your enemy, is to de-humanize him. As soon as you don't see him/her as a "real" person, but someone EVIL/Different/Stupid/UnWorthy etc, it's really easy to kill or destroy them. The opposite is also true. As soon as you have to kill your enemy and you see him as brother/mother/sister/wife, then you have a much harder time overcoming the natural compassion we all have.

Hopefully both sides can come to see each other as human, as one who deserves compassion. Then we might see a change.

Thanks again!

Cheers!

Re:Way off topic for being on the wrong side

[Ms.Taken]

I know I'll probably get modded down as off-topic, strangely enough, that's one of the reasons I'm posting this. Call it a protest against biased moderators who have only modded the posts on one side of this debate off-topic, while leaving the other side alone, or even modding them up.

Well, to get back on topic with this off-topic topic.

What's that supposed to mean? That Israel are the bad guys?

Of course that's what it's supposed to mean. The question is: is that what it does mean? Are those numbers even accurate? If so why not post a attribution? (I checked the link. There's no sign of those numbers there). Even if they did have some basis in reality, they'd still just be raw statistics, not very meaningful out of context. For example, do the numbers include suicide bombers or careless bomb makers? What about those killed as collaborators by their own people?

The one thing that should be clear to anyone following recent events, is that the situation cannot continue as it is. The only paths open seem to be compromise or mutual destruction. In such a situation, demonizing either side shows a remarkable callousness towards everyone involved.

Re:Way off topic for being on the wrong side

[GSloop]

OT again... :)

Well, I think what the poster wants to point out, is that in a numerical sense, the palestinians are much worse off. I think they're getting the shaft in lots of other ways too...

For every Isreali that dies, something like 4 palestinians die.

Both sides are acting like kids in a sandbox - "You hit me first!" "No you did." "Make him stop first" etc.

Frankly, I think we (the US) should take our millitary aid, and leave the Israelies to duke it out with sticks and rocks - just like the palestinians. (But we won't because that would destabilize the region, and cheap oil would vanish - I don't think we care a bit about the Israelis at all...) Then, it might actually make both sides stop and think about how neither would be able to win. Finally they might grow tired of fighting endlessly, and actually learn to live together. Right now, both sides are the bad guys. Killing isn't the solution. Unfortunatly, I don't know what is, I just have some ideas.

Perhaps I'm niave, but it sure looks to me as if the US is prolonging the problem, and doesn't care, because it hasn't threatened our supply of oil yet.

Cheers!

Re:Hell yes.

[EnderWiggnz]

let me guess, you dont think THIS prosecution is worth spending money on, but chasing after willy's bjs... THAT was money well spent...

sigh.

Re:Informal Poll

[Anonymous Coward]

The aliens are coming and soon your children will be their children. Once the fucking contract runs out it's all over for them, then the monkeys will come in and eat your houses and your car.

Re:Way off topic for being on the wrong side

[Olinator]

Blockpoth the quoster:

Frankly, I think we (the US) should take our millitary aid, and leave the Israelies to duke it out with sticks and rocks - just like the palestinians.

Israel might be able to tough it through the loss of American military aid. (Or did you think that the U.S. is the only nuclear nation covertly investigating the idea of small tacnukes?) However, the thing Israel cannot afford to lose is the U.S.'s unwavering veto on the UN Security Council. Absent that, UN sanctions would hit them hard and fast.

Ole