Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!ucbvax!decwrl!shelby!polya!wolvesden!gangolli From: gangolli@wolvesden.Stanford.EDU (Anil R. Gangolli) Newsgroups: gnu.misc.discuss Subject: Re: "Apple Dealt Stunning Legal Blow" Message-ID: <10973@polya.Stanford.EDU> Date: 30 Jul 89 18:53:02 GMT References: <8907271243.AA04246@wheat-chex> <8907280357.AA07142@wheat-chex> Sender: USENET News System Reply-To: gangolli@wolvesden.Stanford.EDU (Anil R. Gangolli) Organization: Stanford University Lines: 17 In article <8907280357.AA07142@wheat-chex> gnu-misc-discuss@cis.ohio-state.edu writes: >All, > I hate tobe a carryer of doom and gloom but The Wall Street >Journal reported the setback to Apple as more of HP & MS were found to >havw not violated the first license agreement. Nothing to do with the >real heart of the matter. The preliminary ruling indeed has nothing to do with the heart of the matter. In fact, while we may all have expected this case to set a precedent on the "look and feel" issue, it may not get a chance to. What remains in the case is such a small portion of the original that the remainder may not be worth Apple's time and money to pursue. If they do pursue it, defense may follow a strategy claiming that the icon and overlapping window ideas were not Apple's originally, which if successful, would still leave the "look and feel" issue undecided. --anil.