[filk] Re: FWD: DoJ Microsoft deadline looms

"Arlene 'Callie' Hills" <callie at twig.com> wrote:

reply> Thought this might be of interest.

> ------- Forwarded Message

reply> From: "R. S. Silverman" <gingi at pobox.com>
> Reply-To: gingi at gingicat.org
> To: filkers at massfilc.org
> Message-ID: <Pine.NEB.4.44.0201231752510.1499-100000 at panix3.panix.com>
> MIME-Version: 1.0
> Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
> Subject: DEADLINE: Public Comment on MS antitrust ends THIS SATURDAY (fwd)
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 17:53:24 -0500 (EST)

reply> Somewhat off-topic, but I thought people on this list might want to know.

> - ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 10:59:39 -0500
> From: Jeff Fabijanic <jeff at research.panasonic.com>
> To: suspects at apocalypse.org
> Subject: DEADLINE: Public Comment on MS antitrust ends THIS SATURDAY
 

reply> Apologies for those of you who try to stay as far away from politics as
> possible, but I thought that this was of a timely enough nature to justify
> a heads-up.

reply> Apparently, Microsoft has been calling thousands+ trying to get them to
> write to the DoJ in favor of dropping the antitrust case against them
> before the end of the public comment period required by the Tunney Act. . . .
> The young lady who answers to that title told me that the caller was
> *extremely* insistent that she write on behalf of MS, and even gave her a
> web site to get a boilerplate letter from. . . .

Courts recognize boilerplate campaigns when they see them. Particularly when it can be pointed out that they were ghosted by an interested party.

                                                                Dan, ad nauseam

P.S. If anyone knows the URL and the case caption, I might send a letter alerting the court just to be certain. Received on 01/23/02