|
|
| New EU Judges for Microsoft Case Proposed |
 |
|
Monday, June 20 2005 @ 03:58 AM EDT
|
This has to be one of the most interesting developments yet in the EU v. Microsoft case, from Reuters:
The top judge of the European Union's second-highest court has proposed changing judges in the Microsoft Corp. antitrust case, according to a letter sent to all parties in the case.
The move, shared with Reuters on Sunday by some of those who have seen the one-paragraph letter sent Friday, comes after internal court criticism directed at the judge heading the Microsoft case because of a controversial article he wrote.
The letter lays out plans by Court of First Instance President Bo Vesterdorf to transfer the case away from the current judge and panel to a larger panel which Vesterdorf will head. The current panel of judges, five of them, is headed by the incredibly named judge, Hubert Legal. Here's what he did: But Legal got into hot water at the court after he published an article in the French journal Concurrences (Competition) saying that some of the judges' clerks tended to regard themselves as "ayatollahs of free enterprise" and should avoid an impression of "arbitrary power."
These young "ayatollahs" can gain a central role when they speak the language of deliberations -- the working language of the court is French -- better than the judges, the article said. That angered judges and clerks at the court, numerous sources said. Legal has said that his article was not intended to criticize Vesterdorf or the court.
Here's a longer version of the same Reuters story, which includes this quotation from Judge Legal: "The essence of our work is to take into account both free enterprise and the regulation of the market," he said. "We cannot afford to stand on one side rather than the other. . . .
"We should first do our normal work, the same way we do in merger cases, of reviewing the legality of the decision," he said in the interview.
Only after considering the Commission's rationale should the court think about altering fines, he said." Now all 25 judges will meet to vote on Vesterdorf's proposals. If it was anyone but Vesterdorf, I'd be really worried. He is the judge that refused to delay sanctions on Microsoft back in December. As a result, I'm only somewhat worried. It does sound, so far, more like a turf battle than a sellout. The original five judges, including Legal, would remain on the case, but would be supplemented with more, and with Legal no longer the lead judge. Here is the link to Concurrences. Meanwhile, Microsoft remains Microsoft. Here's a story on Netscape fixing an "IE problem," which had been discussed at length on Microsoft employee Dave Massy's blog. Netscape, until the fix in 8.02, would show IE pages with XML as empty pages. Massy suggested solving the problem by removing Netscape, and lots of comments ensued, mostly critical of Netscape for causing the problem. Well, it turns out, according to AOL, that it really was an IE problem, caused by Microsoft: But AOL spokesman Andrew Weinstein blamed Internet Explorer for the fault. He said that when officials were amending the XML problem, they came across faulty documentation on Internet Explorer, which is the likely reason behind of the problem.
I don't know, personally, who is to blame, despite that deja vu feeling, but I recommend reading the comments on the Massy page. I found it illuminating to see the Microsoft world view.
|
|
|
|
| Authored by: MathFox on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 04:33 AM EDT |
Put your off-topic comments in this tread; make links clickable by posting in
HTML mode.
---
When people start to comment on the form of the message, it is a sign that they
have problems to accept the truth of the message.
[ Reply to This | # ]
|
- US Visa? Use Internet Cafe - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 05:56 AM EDT
- Microsoft vs Bittorrent - embrace/extend/extinguish - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 06:40 AM EDT
- RMS in the Guardian - Authored by: Naich on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 08:51 AM EDT
- Finding the schedule - Authored by: capt.Hij on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 09:50 AM EDT
- news.com: Microsoft and Adobe to square off? - Authored by: macrorodent on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 10:40 AM EDT
- Current events, calendar. - Authored by: gnuadam on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 11:00 AM EDT
- My Name is My Game - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 12:31 PM EDT
- Off this Topic: BBC, cassette tapes (royalty-free and recordable) - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 12:35 PM EDT
- OT-How patents are supposed to work - Authored by: wvhillbilly on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 02:41 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: Totosplatz on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 04:39 AM EDT |
The very last paragraph appears to be incorrectly indented; I believe it is
from PJ and so should not be indented. ---
All the best to one and all. [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: marbux on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 05:21 AM EDT |
. . . is headed by the incredibly named judge, Hubert
Legal.
Brings to mind the prominent U.S. appellate judge
Learned Hand, or former head of the U.S. Drug Enforcement Agency John Lawn, or
Joseph Keller's Catch 22 character, Major Major, or ...
---
Retired lawyer [ Reply to This | # ]
|
- More names... - Authored by: Totosplatz on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 05:39 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: jmc on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 06:07 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: archonix on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 06:24 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: jmc on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 07:37 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: Wol on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 08:22 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 09:06 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: archonix on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 12:20 PM EDT
- Names - Authored by: fLameDogg on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 10:34 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 02:10 PM EDT
- Names - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 03:40 PM EDT
- Names - Authored by: emmenjay on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 06:40 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 09:23 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: ff5166 on Tuesday, June 21 2005 @ 04:59 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 08:06 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 10:06 AM EDT
- Names - Authored by: eskild on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 01:34 PM EDT
- Banker named Coyne - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 02:04 PM EDT
- Nominative Determinism - n/t - Authored by: Anonymous on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 09:21 PM EDT
- Names - Authored by: billposer on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 11:48 PM EDT
| |
| Authored by: MeinZy on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 07:43 AM EDT |
| The original five judges, including Legal, would remain on the case,
but
would be supplemented with more, and with Legal no longer the
lead
judge.
Sounds like new fertile bureauocratic turf for MicroSoft
obfuscation. Kinda
like adding Miracle Grow. Good Grief!
---
Zy -- 'Square
peg in a round Earth' [ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: Bas Burger on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 08:58 AM EDT |
So effectively they do a round of fights among each other in the mids of such a
important case?
Do we have to do with utter incompetence here?
This doesn't sound well when we get even more important cases like the whole
patent issue.
To be honest I am worried with this one...
Bas.
---
DIRECTUS ELATUS PERTINAX[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: billyskank on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 04:25 PM EDT |
In Britain there is an even more incredibly named Lord Justice Judge.
---
It's not the software that's free; it's you.[ Reply to This | # ]
|
| |
| Authored by: rick stockton on Monday, June 20 2005 @ 06:52 PM EDT |
First Mr. Jackson, now Mr. Legal. Why do Judges in these cases keep saying
things which result in their penalties being overturned or "reviewed",
and (in the US case) converted into a REWARD for the guilty?
---
Rick S[ Reply to This | # ]
|
|
|
|
|
