feynoob
Banned
Really showing their ass, eh?

Really showing their ass, eh?
You think if Microsoft want to call witnesses to testify based on certain evidence that the FTC should ‘get bent’ rather than get to see the evidence themselves first hand?
Interesting.
No, they should get bent because Derek's previous tweet when he was live tweeting said that 'they don't want it because they don't understand specific parts of it'.
![]()
Them not understanding is not a basis for them having issues with potential testimony.
![]()
Ok, makes more sense than what you quoted previously but sounds like typical wrangling to me. The CMA also told the CAT judge that if Microsoft want to start introducing witnesses the procedure will be slowed down, which I presumed would be because they’d need time to analyse what is being said and what the sources of information are behind it.
Them not understanding is not a basis for them having issues with potential testimony.
Not like MS doesn't have a history of being very convoluted.How do you know?
Not like MS doesn't have a history of being very convoluted.
Microsoft's lawyer Beth Wilkinson explained that the FTC did not raise the issue of Microsoft having asserted privilege over some of those documents until yesterday.
At the moment both Democrats and Republicans want to get Big Tech. For different reasons sure, but their desired outcomes are the same. So really the political leanings won't matter much here.
Were they known about in advance?The judge didn't make a ruling on that point one way or the other anyway, and it sounds like FTC didn't raise any issue about it a day before today either.
I think it is absolutely grounds for them having issues with the testimony. If someone wants to talk about "X and Y and Z" being the foundation for reason(s) that the FTC shouldn't block the merger, the FTC needs to understand those points in full to make a proper decision. I don't think anyone wants a legal system making rulings using information it doesn't understand. If the EC was happy with the remedies because it saw documents A and B and contract C, and Microsoft wants to use the EC's decision to convince the FTC, I think it's entirely fair that they should produce documents A and B and contract C and then draw out the EC's reasoning in crayon for the FTC. I don't really see why this is an issue, unless the FTC's lack of understanding is desired to push them toward ruling one way over another?... Them not understanding is not a basis for them having issues with potential testimony.
Were they known about in advance?
I think it is absolutely grounds for them having issues with the testimony. If someone wants to talk about "X and Y and Z" being the foundation for reason(s) that the FTC shouldn't block the merger, the FTC needs to understand those points in full to make a proper decision. I don't think anyone wants a legal system making rulings using information it doesn't understand. If the EC was happy with the remedies because it saw documents A and B and contract C, and Microsoft wants to use the EC's decision to convince the FTC, I think it's entirely fair that they should produce documents A and B and contract C and then draw out the EC's reasoning in crayon for the FTC. I don't really see why this is an issue, unless the FTC's lack of understanding is desired to push them toward ruling one way over another?
You’ve just been checkmated.Good twist.
![]()
Cant help when people cant read properly.You’ve just been checkmated.
I called it.
They are prepping Bond if this deal fails.
I called it.
They are prepping Bond if this deal fails.
Better hope Phil got another life left.
As much as we hate phil, he is much better than her. She is corporate yes man like don mattrick.if Phill didn't kill xbox, she will
that is what i am saying. Phill at least has experience in videogames....or something.As much as we hate phil, he is much better than her. She is corporate yes man like don mattrick.
Xbox aint going to move forward with her.
I called it.
They are prepping Bond if this deal fails.
We won’t know until we see her shelf.As much as we hate phil, he is much better than her. She is corporate yes man like don mattrick.
Xbox aint going to move forward with her.
You think if Microsoft want to call witnesses to testify based on certain evidence that the FTC should ‘get bent’ rather than get to see the evidence themselves first hand?
Interesting.
Lol.
Yeah, “evidence” apparently has no business in this clown show defense they’re running
After some deliberations with the mod team/admins, we will remove continued posts of Florian in this thread. Please find and utilize other sources of information.
Thank You.
Do we have a another source for this? Confirmation that this was actually said?
It means that I simp for the merits, not for the companyWe have a guy with Sony name, MS avatar and Nintendo tag. Yet simps for MS.
Shit is too funny.
It means that I simp for the merits, not for the companyAll along this merger, I haven't seen any substansive arguments against it other than "MS shouldn't get bigger".
MS going with the Believe You Me strategy
Probably Indiana Jones? They had a contract with Disney before the acquisition, probably almost surely it stipulates which platforms they were going to develop it for.
Redfall/Starfield are Xbox/PC-only: "keeping with the need to offer some exclusive content while mitigating the economic costs and damage to its player-focused brand" - Redfall "generated minimal sales" - "many other" future ZeniMax titles will be shipped on PS/Nintendo
Laughable.
Which is?But you cannot just dismiss the single biggest argument like it's some arbitrary point for the sake of having one.
remember COD is too ‘big’ for Xbox to take exclusive yet somehow Elder Scrolls isn’t but other ‘smaller’ stuff is definitely going to not be exclusiveRedfall/Starfield are Xbox/PC-only: "keeping with the need to offer some exclusive content while mitigating the economic costs and damage to its player-focused brand" - Redfall "generated minimal sales" - "many other" future ZeniMax titles will be shipped on PS/Nintendo
Laughable.
Smaller stuff like Quake remastered? Which released on everything after that acquisition went through?remember COD is too ‘big’ for Xbox to take exclusive yet somehow Elder Scrolls isn’t but other ‘smaller’ stuff is definitely going to not be exclusiveMicrosoft’s even willing to pinky promise
it released in August just mere months after the acquisition was completed, likely it was too far along for them to cancel unlike everything since thenSmaller stuff like Quake remastered? Which released on everything after that acquisition went through?
Not sure if tweets from tom warren are allowed or not in this OT, but he tweeted this.
Not sure if tweets from tom warren are allowed or not in this OT, but he tweeted this.
Not sure if tweets from tom warren are allowed or not in this OT, but he tweeted this.
I have that dumbass blocked on twitter so no worries there.Tom's a shill but not a psychopath like Florian. Tom's tweets are fine, just keep away from FossPatents.
Not sure if tweets from tom warren are allowed or not in this OT, but he tweeted this.
Obfuscate obfuscate obfuscateWhy is any of this relevant for a temporary injunction hearing? These things can be argued argued at the already scheduled FTC hearing.
It's the classic making yourself seem pathetic "Your penis is so big...wow....my penis so small, so small" lineWhy is any of this relevant for a temporary injunction hearing? These things can be argued argued at the already scheduled FTC hearing.
Not sure if tweets from tom warren are allowed or not in this OT, but he tweeted this.