Okay, this is out there on a limb with all of the area 51 folks, but consider this:
Adopting Andy Rooney whine:
"ever wonder why M$ was added to the Dow right before this finding of fact...could it be so that the gov't now has a vested interest in making sure that MS gets off scott free, because to punish MS would damage the economy? M$ health is now a matter of national security."
Congratulations Bill, we never saw that one coming!
My point exactly--I fear that a jury will be influenced by slick M$ lawyers and decide not on fact, but on emotion. My snotty aside was a product of my disgust with the slimy tactics employed by M$ dirtbags. I used to think that the most disgusting, soul- wrenching job in the universe would be to defend rapists and child molesters. Then I decided it would be to represent oil or tobacco companies. I now have a new candidate: M$ lawyers. Anyone who reads or hears the dreck produced by these slugs (inlcuding the testimony of Bill himself) cannot help but retch. It's about time.
I'm glad we have a lawyer involved in this discussion. Isn't there a substantial risk that a fact-heavy case such as this one might be a crap shoot with a jury? I've heard that cases involving technical evidence (molecular biology, DNA, thefts of code, etc.) can be difficult for juries to grasp. (I personally served on two juries, and would hate for those folks to have to judge the evidence in either Microsoft case.)
Isn't is possible that a jury finding of fact might be fairly irrational; influenced more heavily by emotion than fact? If that's the case I see it going either way--I know a lot of corporate types who think that all this "persecution" of Microsoft is way out of line. (Of course I try to avoid them whenever I can!)
Then again, this is Microsoft, so we have to rejoice at the fact that it's harder to buy off an entire jury than it is to influence a single judge!
Maybe I misread the original, but i got the impression you were talking about graphics manipulation algorithms. If that's the case then check out the gimp (http://www.gimp.org/). Under the GPL you have full access to every aspect of the code, and I can't think of a better way to get a look at graphics manipulation algorithms. No need to RE from assembly--you've got the source.
Slashdot Mirror
Okay, this is out there on a limb with all of the area 51 folks, but consider this:
Adopting Andy Rooney whine:
"ever wonder why M$ was added to the Dow right before this finding of fact...could it be so that the gov't now has a vested interest in making sure that MS gets off scott free, because to punish MS would damage the economy? M$ health is now a matter of national security."
Congratulations Bill, we never saw that one coming!
My point exactly--I fear that a jury will be influenced by slick M$ lawyers and decide not on fact, but on emotion. My snotty aside was a product of my disgust with the slimy tactics employed by M$ dirtbags. I used to think that the most disgusting, soul- wrenching job in the universe would be to defend rapists and child molesters. Then I decided it would be to represent oil or tobacco companies. I now have a new candidate: M$ lawyers. Anyone who reads or hears the dreck produced by these slugs (inlcuding the testimony of Bill himself) cannot help but retch. It's about time.
I'm glad we have a lawyer involved in this discussion. Isn't there a substantial risk that a fact-heavy case such as this one might be a crap shoot with a jury? I've heard that cases involving technical evidence (molecular biology, DNA, thefts of code, etc.) can be difficult for juries to grasp. (I personally served on two juries, and would hate for those folks to have to judge the evidence in either Microsoft case.)
Isn't is possible that a jury finding of fact might be fairly irrational; influenced more heavily by emotion than fact? If that's the case I see it going either way--I know a lot of corporate types who think that all this "persecution" of Microsoft is way out of line.
(Of course I try to avoid them whenever I can!)
Then again, this is Microsoft, so we have to rejoice at the fact that it's harder to buy off an entire jury than it is to influence a single judge!
Maybe I misread the original, but i got the impression you were talking about graphics manipulation algorithms. If that's the case then check out the gimp (http://www.gimp.org/). Under the GPL you have full access to every aspect of the code, and I can't think of a better way to get a look at graphics manipulation algorithms. No need to RE from assembly--you've got the source.