Microsoft Hatred FAQ

[Paul Rubin]

"David Schwartz" <davids at webmaster.com> writes:

>     The appeals courts upheld that the trial court did not abuse its 
> discretion. However, both a finding of "yes, Microsoft had a monopoly" and a 
> finding of "no, Microsoft did not have a monopoly" would both have been 
> within the trial court's discretion.

No, that finding would have been contradictory to the facts at hand.

> They could just as easily have found that Linux, OSX, FreeBSD, and
> other operating systems competed with Windows.

Nice try, but those other OS's did not have enough market share to
prevent the finding of monopoly under the law.

>     To call it an "established legal fact" is to grossly distort the 
> circumstances under which it was determined and upheld.

Who is paying you to post such nonsense?  If the trial court
determines a fact and it's upheld on appeal, it's an established legal
fact regardless of whether you or Microsoft likes it.