[lug] US v. Microsoft

[Riggs, Rob]

"The rest of the comments weren't even germane to the comment form" --
hardly. 7,000 pieces were garbage "opinion" pieces. The rest (15,000
anti-settlement, 7,500 pro-settlement) were valid public comments on the
settlement. These are exactly the sort of comments that the rules require to
be collected.

You are correct in stating that this is not a popularity contest. The
requirement that comments be solicited from the *general public* allow the
judge to determine whether the public believes the government is acting in
their best interest. There is no expectation that John Q. Public will write
a legal brief on the subject. "The law was specifically written to allow the
public to decide what is and is not good for it." --
http://www.hyperlaw.com/hldocreq.htm

It's quite telling that most articles confuse (or equate) "anti-settlement"
to "anti-MS". That would indicate that most of the citizens who commented,
along with the press, do not believe that the government is working in the
best interest of the citizenry in this case.

-Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: carter s johnson [mailto:carter.johnson at juno.com]
Sent: Friday, February 08, 2002 4:00 PM
To: lug at lug.boulder.co.us
Subject: [lug] US v. Microsoft



That isn't exactly the case... yeah there were 30,000 messages to the DOJ
and they estimated that a whopping 45 of them were considered major
comments on the rulings. (like 100 page legal commentaries about it) So
there will be another day of hearings to consider that input. The rest of
the comments weren't even germane to the comment form with most of those
lacking an expression of any opinion about the settlement. E-mailing 
Microsoft sucks to the DOJ isn't terribly helpful to this already whacky
process. But whatever this process is it certainly isn't a popularity
poll on Microsoft..

Carter Johnson





There were 30,000 comments on the antitrust settlement, mostly against
it. The justice dept asks for 30 more days to evaluate and summarize
and then publish on Feb 27th.
 
But this really is a travesty: The DOJ and MS then propose only 2
business days for the rest of the workd to see it before the last
hearing on March 4th, to last only one day with no outside parties
allowed comment, not even the many dissenting states.
 
Will the govt servers even be up to it?
 
So much for respecting the public interest. This process seeks to
sweep the whole thing under the rug before the press can even read the
comments....
 
I hope the judge sees this desperation bid as a reflection of how
inappropriate the actions of the new Ashcroft justice department are,
and finds that the whole settlement is entirely contrary to the public
interest.
 
Neal McBurnett <neal at bcn.boulder.co.us>
http://bcn.boulder.co.us/~neal/
GPG/PGP signed and/or sealed mail encouraged.  Keyid: 2C9EBA60
_______________________________________________
Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug
________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit:
http://dl.www.juno.com/get/web/.
_______________________________________________
Web Page:  http://lug.boulder.co.us
Mailing List: http://lists.lug.boulder.co.us/mailman/listinfo/lug