I felt like a distinct minority arguing that Jackson was the best thing that ever happened to Microsoft. He was so clearly biased in his view of Microsoft and so arbitrary in his rulings and decisions, that he pretty much guaranteed that his ruling against the company would never stand up.
Biased judges are nothing new, but usually they try to be a bit more discrete.
The system would be a shambles if all judges did that. Edwards went so far as to ask whether or not Jackson's conduct might have violated the oath he took upon becoming a federal judge. A lot of anti-MS commentators made much of the fact that as the finder of fact, the appellate court would probably be unwilling to overturn Jackson's finding that Microsoft had attempted to use its Windows dominance to harm Netscape. Copyright 1998-2001 by Brian Carnell . All rights reserved.