My first two nominees for this list of Asshole judges:

Lewis A. KAPLAN - United States District Judge from New York. He ruled in favor of the eight movie studios -- including Universal Studios, MGM, and Time Warner. He granted an injunction against people publishing the DeCSS source code. His ruling specifically finds that the Digital Millennium Copyright Act (which prohibits the publication of computer programs designed to circumvent copy protection) is constitutional, and does not infringe on the defendants' free speech rights. He also suggests that computer source code is not ordinarily a form of expression ... See: http://www.2600.com/ Is this judge brain dead? Contact him at: Daniel Patrick Moynihan United States Courthouse 500 Pearl Street, Room 1310 New York, New York 10007-1312 (212) 805-0216 Courtroom 12D http://www.nysd.uscourts.gov

The other nominee is Thomas Penfield Jackson, U.S. District Judge handling the Microsoft antitrust case. Whatever one thinks of Microsoft and the "quality" of their software - this judge doesn't seem to be all there. He talks about " ... a man badly in need of public relations advice -- and of a liaison with a court of appeals that has rebuked him in almost unprecedented language for legal errors. Two years ago, Washingtonian magazine ranked him at the bottom in its analysis of local federal judges. ``Jackson is one of the least-respected judges on the federal bench,'' wrote Washingtonian national editor Kim Eisler. ``Attorneys say he is mean, tyrannical and doesn't know the law.'' Source: San Jose Mercury News, Jan. 22, 1998 ... he receives frequent criticism that he is impulsive and shoots from the hip. A Republican appointed to the bench by President Reagan in 1982. Born: Jan. 10, 1937 Law school: Harvard, 1964

In 1997, he presented a commentary on high-profile cases at a judicial conference in which he said, "Remember the nature of the beast. The press, like all infectious diseases, is a predator. It will feed on whatever it can find, including the host, if its appetite is not sated."

Born in the District and a graduate of Bethesda-Chevy Chase High School, Jackson is the son of Thomas Searing Jackson, who founded the litigation firm that is now known as Jackson & Campbell. After Dartmouth College and Harvard Law School, he joined his father's firm, where he practiced from 1964 until he was named to the bench in 1982.

At the firm, Jackson specialized in defending hospitals against malpractice suits. He also became active in Republican politics in Montgomery County, Maryland. He was an attorney for CREEP, the Committee to Re-Elect the President, many of whose operatives got caught up in the Watergate scandal.

Comments about the judges Microsoft findings: "The major error I saw was his misunderstanding of Linux and the Open Source movement. He completely misses (or chooses to miss) the fact that there is a thriving commercial Linux business ..." http://www.pbs.org/cringely/pulpit/pulpit19991111.html

Contact info: (202) 354-3310 333 Constitution Avenue, N.W. Washington, D.C. 20001 http://www.dcd.uscourts.gov/

-------------------------

Please feel free to add to this list - and do provide contact info.

-- richard (zpub@sirius.com), July 18, 2000

Answers

Hey, give Jackson some credit! It's Robert X. Cringely who misunderstood Jackson, not Jackson who misunderstood Linux. Cringley missed, or disagreed with Jackson's definition of/explanation of the Intel- based desktop PC OS market. I've tried to get 'joe luser' to use Linux on the desktop, it was not a viable alternative, mostly for the reasons Jackson gives, starting on page 6 - the very high applications barrier to entry, meaning that most apps are written for Windows only and the constantly changing Windows APIs make WABI & WINE type products infeasible, the sunk costs in software and expertise,

The DOJ did not present, and Jackson ignored hundreds of well known MS transgressions. They concentrated on the ones for which the evidence for specific and clear violations of antitrust law provided conclusive proof. Jackson's findings of fact prove the antitrust violations with a precision that is almost mathematical. It leaves the Apellate court with no wiggle room - making it extremely difficult for them to disagree with his findings. This will be v. important, IMNSHO. -Matthew

-- Anonymous Coward (nerd@technologist.com), October 13, 2000.