A judge's legal ruling can be a complex interaction between facts and laws However, if a judge bases his ruling on erroneous technological theories, speculation, and forecasts, the final decision will be a wasteland of legal mumbo-jumbo, incomprehensible to both lawyers and critics This is what happened when Judge Thomas Penfield Jackson decided озцщн the Microsoft antitrust case, ordering the division of the software giant into two separate companies In a major new study of the Microsoft antitrust case, Hudson Institute economist Alan Reynolds examines, point for point, every Finding of Fact on which Judge Jackson based his conclusions He critiques the accuracy, consistency, and relevance of nearly all of the judge's 412 Facts, finding that half of the facts went unmentioned in the judge's legal conclusions This leads Reynolds to the verdict that the case is "literally baseless " The book also provides detailed reporting of key meetings and memos from Microsoft, Netscape, and many more top players involved in the trial or the computer software and hardware industries Reynolds brings the reader deep into the world of legal questions surrounding computers and software, and gives deep insights into this increasingly important industry Richard B McKenzie, the author of Trust on Trial, has written, "Alan Reynolds has probably done more to undermine the government's case than all of Microsoft's lawyers combined ".  Переводчик:ISBN 1558131302.