Sorry to burst your bubble but state supported schools are subject to every rule and regulation that states are as they are public institutions. Have a nice day
I looked up the lawyer (Michael Morrison) named in the demand letter in Martindale-Hubbell http://lawyers.martindale.com/marhub which is probably the best place to look up a lawyer to see if the lawyer is really a lawyer. I found a Micheal J. Morrison licensed in Nevada and a Michael J. T. Morrison licensed in New York. Who knows whether or not the guy who wrote the letter is really a lawyer? Maybe the lawyer will post to Slashdot - but only believe the post if the guy provides a bar license number that anyone can lookup at the appropriate state bar webpage. The whole situation is very weird. By the way I tried to download a copy of Linuxone and I got nothing! Ed
That statement is not about damages to the consumer. Would you want the government to tell you what you could sell something for? Any relation to damages in the fof is pure conjecture. The court needs more than consumers feel harmed or/. people hate windows. They need a reasonabnle dollar amount. An analogy to another OS would be nice but that may not work as windows until recently did not have much competition,but that is not MS's fault. Anyway any class action verdict is only going to hurt MS and make lawyers very rich which would accomplish nothing constructive unless you feel destroying a company is a good thing.
that statement in the fof is a guess or conjecture by judge jackson. LIke saying gateway sold a computer for 2 grand when they could have sold it for one grand. THat fof should not hold up in the damages phase of any class action. You need something to compare the cost of windows with - the analogy with the drop in hardware prices could work but I would prefer something more concrete. Damages have to be something more than a bunch of consumers or people on/. feel harmed.
the big problem with any class action is demonstrating damages, in other words for a class action to be a successful the pliantiff would have to put a dollar figure to show damages. Jackson's finding of fact did not have much to say on damages and the standard for determining damages is fairly so strict so an arbitrary forgure should not work though depending on the judge. Also - their are many other complications - not to mention that if MS pushs any class action to trial, a verdict could and most likely would be years from now and i mean many years. Just a little of my worthless opinion. Ed
THe fof written by Jackson was so poorly constructed from a legal point of view that any appeal is likely to succeed regardless of the merits of the case. The fof contains many holes and overreaching conclusions that any judge would find unexceptable. Don't be surprised if the Supreme Court orders Jackson to try again. Ed
THis judge has been over-ruled several times on previous MS decisions he has made, especially regarding some of the fof about IE. The appeals court has previously ruled that Judge Jackson is in no postion to make a technical determination of internet explorer for example paragraph 173 that ie has a negative effect on consumers. That is only one example of some of the questionable findings from a legal point of view that judge jackson made. He is right about some things - MS does things that are restrictive and anticompetive and the court should require that MS change some of its practice. I wish I had the time and space to to go through the fof line by but i don't. Just don't be surprised if the appeals court overrules judge jackson and restricts the type of damages he can order plus changes the fof despite what the/. legal expert says. This trial is not over by any means and the only way to tell who truly won is to wait a few years and then make a determination. Ed Bailey
Slashdot Mirror
Sorry to burst your bubble but state supported schools are subject to every rule and regulation that states are as they are public institutions. Have a nice day
I looked up the lawyer (Michael Morrison) named in the demand letter in Martindale-Hubbell http://lawyers.martindale.com/marhub which is probably the best place to look up a lawyer to see if the lawyer is really a lawyer. I found a Micheal J. Morrison licensed in Nevada and a Michael J. T. Morrison licensed in New York. Who knows whether or not the guy who wrote the letter is really a lawyer? Maybe the lawyer will post to Slashdot - but only believe the post if the guy provides a bar license number that anyone can lookup at the appropriate state bar webpage. The whole situation is very weird. By the way I tried to download a copy of Linuxone and I got nothing! Ed
That statement is not about damages to the consumer. Would you want the government to tell you what you could sell something for? Any relation to damages in the fof is pure conjecture. The court needs more than consumers feel harmed or /. people hate windows. They need a reasonabnle dollar amount. An analogy to another OS would be nice but that may not work as windows until recently did not have much competition,but that is not MS's fault. Anyway any class action verdict is only going to hurt MS and make lawyers very rich which would accomplish nothing constructive unless you feel destroying a company is a good thing.
that statement in the fof is a guess or conjecture by judge jackson. LIke saying gateway sold a computer for 2 grand when they could have sold it for one grand. THat fof should not hold up in the damages phase of any class action. You need something to compare the cost of windows with - the analogy with the drop in hardware prices could work but I would prefer something more concrete. Damages have to be something more than a bunch of consumers or people on /. feel harmed.
the big problem with any class action is demonstrating damages, in other words for a class action to be a successful the pliantiff would have to put a dollar figure to show damages. Jackson's finding of fact did not have much to say on damages and the standard for determining damages is fairly so strict so an arbitrary forgure should not work though depending on the judge. Also - their are many other complications - not to mention that if MS pushs any class action to trial, a verdict could and most likely would be years from now and i mean many years. Just a little of my worthless opinion. Ed
This is the same guy that believes the government should regulate the internet becasue private groups and people cannot.
THe fof written by Jackson was so poorly constructed from a legal point of view that any appeal is likely to succeed regardless of the merits of the case. The fof contains many holes and overreaching conclusions that any judge would find unexceptable. Don't be surprised if the Supreme Court orders Jackson to try again. Ed
THis judge has been over-ruled several times on previous MS decisions he has made, especially regarding some of the fof about IE. The appeals court has previously ruled that Judge Jackson is in no postion to make a technical determination of internet explorer for example paragraph 173 that ie has a negative effect on consumers. That is only one example of some of the questionable findings from a legal point of view that judge jackson made. He is right about some things - MS does things that are restrictive and anticompetive and the court should require that MS change some of its practice. I wish I had the time and space to to go through the fof line by but i don't. Just don't be surprised if the appeals court overrules judge jackson and restricts the type of damages he can order plus changes the fof despite what the /. legal expert says. This trial is not over by any means and the only way to tell who truly won is to wait a few years and then make a determination. Ed Bailey