[Am-info] Re: End Game/ feeble solution

[Glenn Livezey]

> From: sturde@az.com
> >IN RE: comments by Glenn T. Livezey.
> Your comments about the inadequacy of the decision.  Judge Jackson in his
> interview commented (and I love his comment) that how can one predict the
> future, when it is so difficult to reconstruct the historical past.  He
> commented that he was not an economist, did not feel adequate to create
> his own solution, that the DOJ and 19 States Attorney General had
> consulted the best and the brightest for their remedy, so he accepted it.
> >From such a viewpoint, his decision makes sense.
> James Sturdevant

I have the utmost respect for the Judge and his commentary, which is more than
I can say for the DOJ and States Attorney Generals (where do you place the s?).
I commend them for finally taking the indictment and prosecution of Gates/Microsoft
seriously, and I do understand the tremendous complexity of such a task. I also can
appreciate that the evidence was not easily compiled nor were the compelling
witnesses lining up around the block to assist the seekers of justice. I realize that
severe limitations exist in what could be done to reverse the damage inflicted by
more than 15 years of unfettered greed. And, as I stated, I also can see that the
current political climate is such that complete justice is not possible. I do agree
that the Judge's decision made sense, given the circumstances. But mores the pity.

However many experts of whatever caliber were assigned to the task, the
feebleness of the "solution" is still stunning. I cannot blame those who framed the plan,
but I still see little meaning in the point that received so much attention - the "splitting"
of Micro and Soft. The further directives to police future business practices of these evil
twins are our only hope. And the "winning" of this case in the public arena, which
is integral to the ultimate resurrection of true competition and innovation, may well
require more time than the current ruling provides.
I am not an economist, nor do I rate myself as either the best or the brightest in
any relevant field. I did not read, much less understand, the full testimony entered
in this court. Perhaps someone could explain to me how insisting that Micro and
Soft "play nice" from now on is a better solution than insisting that Microsoft as an
intact entity "play nice" from now on. But I don't need further evidence nor
explanation to conclude that the legally allowable solutions to this problem are
entirely inadequate to any approximation of justice.
I have no better legally acceptable solution. But that none exist is my lament.

Glenn T. Livezey, Ph.D.

University of Minnesota
Neuroscience Department
Room 6-145 Jackson Hall
321 Church St. S.E.
Minneapolis, MN 55455

(612) 624-2991 FAX 6-5009
glivezey@lenti.med.umn.edu
absent-minded_professor@bigfoot.com