Microsoft's acquisition of Activison Blizzard
- Thread starter Darth Vader
- Start date
Florian Mueller gloating on his twitter. Claims cloud isn't a market also, lol.
I'd say they annoyed the judge and focused on the wrong arguments. They could've done better.
Yeah, they kept circling back to Playstation and imo that doesn't make too much sense
Well I think there is nothing lost. They will probably revise today’s records and talk about their next strategy for upcoming hearing. FTC can still persuade the judge if they hit the right points.
The problem is that the judge’s son works for Microsoft. There’s a heavy conflict of interest here. I don’t understand why FTC isn’t doing anything about it.
Because the stadia guy said they were competing with ms and playstation right?
I mean Netflix was competing with blockbuster at one point. Are they really the same market? Not calling Sony and ms blockbuster here lol, but just as an example of different markets competing but still being seperate.
Besides CMA, EC and Korea all called it a market.
If FTC is arguing a case for an SLC on two fronts, console and cloud, it's fine for them to focus on PlayStation for a day or two.
Microsoft’s Phil Spencer didn’t answer when asked if other Activision Blizzard games, beyond Call of Duty, would be on PlayStation in the future. Microsoft lawyer objected to the question when asked by FTC.
I'm thinking maybe they are betting the judge to be a bit more favourable to them? And don't want to risk it with another judge.
Or maybe even leave that smoking gun in an appeal to drag it out even longer by getting a new judge?
Although considering the judge has come out and said it and FTC haven't objected yet, that might be them consenting to that so can't really use that in an appeal.
Very bad idea to try to get a judge to recuse herself based on tenuous links. If she doesn't then you have fucked yourself very badly and might not have any recourse in the appeal phase.
Also, this injunction thing only really works if they get it the 1st time, if they don't then it's a federal appeal and that takes time, time in which MS/ABK can gain ground with their CAT Appeal and maybe hash out a new merger agreement if needed.
Tenous link? Her son works for microsoft, she admitted it. You don't need an extensive trial and evidence to figure out the length a parent goes to make things favourable for their child.
I'm not saying she will, but it will always be a risk.
It is conflict of interest. It is basic and one of the grounds of fairness in trials etc..