Path: utzoo!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!rice!eunomia.rice.edu!bro From: bro@eunomia.rice.edu (Douglas Monk) Newsgroups: comp.sys.atari.st Subject: Re: Apple wins against Microsoft Windows/HP New Wave Summary: Could Xerox still license to Windows etc., or is it Public Domain? Message-ID: <1991Mar17.202041.933@rice.edu> Date: 17 Mar 91 20:20:41 GMT References: <1991Mar13.163621.6682@midway.uchicago.edu> <1991Mar13.184236.26029@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> Sender: news@rice.edu (News) Organization: Rice University, Houston Lines: 28 In article <1991Mar13.184236.26029@jato.jpl.nasa.gov> vsnyder@jato.Jpl.Nasa.Gov (Van Snyder) writes: >NOTE network.thought.police: don't read this article. >In article <1991Mar13.163621.6682@midway.uchicago.edu> jcav@quads.uchicago.edu (john cavallino) writes: >>The Xerox action against Apple [...] was thrown out of court. >>[...] something about Xerox having waited too long to bring the action. >It's called the "doctrine of laches:" If somebody else is using your >property, and you know it, and you do nothing to protect it, after a certain >period of time (5 years, think, but perhaps depending on the property and >jurisdiction), you no longer have the right to protect it. Legal question 1: Do the property rights devolve to the usurper, or can the original owner still sell, transfer, lease, (or license) it to others? Legal question 2: If neither of the above, wouldn't the property become "Public Domain"? (Though I cannot think of a physical analogy for this, the trademark analogy would be: if you defend your trademark, you can prevent it from being used by others. If you do not defend it (within a certain period of time) it can be used *by anyone*. Thus the constant battles about using trademarked terms in a generic sense (coke(TM), polaroid(TM), xerox(TM :-) etc.). Doug Monk (bro@rice.edu) Disclaimer: These views are mine, not necessarily my organization's.