Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!relay.nswc.navy.mil!oasys!mimsy!tove.cs.umd.edu!folta
From: folta@tove.cs.umd.edu (Wayne Folta)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac.misc
Subject: Re: Re: Apple Computer wins ruling against 'Windows'
Message-ID: <31780@mimsy.umd.edu>
Date: 21 Mar 91 04:08:42 GMT
References: <1991Mar15.101202.1@csc.anu.edu.au> <67830001@hpcupt1.cup.hp.com>
Sender: news@mimsy.umd.edu
Reply-To: folta@tove.cs.umd.edu (Wayne Folta)
Distribution: usa
Organization: U of Maryland, Dept. of Computer Science, Coll. Pk., MD 20742
Lines: 62

I don't know where some of the claims of an Apple loss come from, but here
is the word from March 7 Wall Street Journal:

   A federal judge boosted Apple Computer Inc's chances to profit from the
   huge popularity of graphical personal-computer command systems, striking
   down several key defense arguments in its copyright infringement case against
   rivals Microsoft Corp and Hewlett-Packard Co.

   ...

   Judge Vaughn Walker issued a decision that undercut arguments that Apple's
   copyrights to the system software for its Macintosh computers were invalid.
   The judge didn't flatly rule that Apple's copyrights were valid, but he
   threw out two key arguments against Apple's claims and said that remaining
   questions about copyright validity and infringement would be settled "in
   connection with adjudication." The arguments dismissed related to whether
   Apple's work was original and whether the company committed fraud on the
   US Copyright Office by failing to disclose certain pre-existing programs
   that influenced its programs.

   The judge also rejected a contention by Microsoft that a license it had
   received from Apple in 1985 gave it the right to certain key technical
   features. The judge found that Apple hadn't given Microsoft rights to use
   "overlapping windows" or certain icon movements, a significant part of the
   look and feel of Apple's Macintosh.

   Judge Walker, maenwhile, held that Hewlett-Packard was entitled to utilize
   certain of Apple's visual displays that Microsoft licensed to it. But the
   judge granted narrower protection than Hewlett-Packard had sought.

   ...

   In his 72-page ruling, the judge rejected a contention that Apple's software,
   which controls the basic operations of the Macintosh, were based on an
   earlier program designed by Xerox Corp. He said that Apple's software was
   independently created and "reveal(s) scant similarity of expression" with
   the Xerox program.

   Additionally, the judge said that Apple's failure to disclose to copyright
   authorities the influence of the Xerox work didn't amount to fraud because
   there was no evidence that Apple's work was infringing Xerox copyrights
   or were substantially borrowed. ...

   Because Microsoft still has many possible legal maneuvers, analysts say it
   isn't likely this decision will prompt a settlement. The judge denied Apple's
   bid to revive the idea that the case turns on an assesment of the "total
   concept of look and feel" of the Macinsoth, as opposed to comparing its
   individual elements with the competing programs.

   ... [Deleted para that said a narrow victory might just involve a
	minor facelift by MS.]

   But Apple officials said because Judge Walker has left the overlapping
   windows issue in the case, Microsoft and Hewlett-Packard may be faced
   with more fundamental changes. "We have demonstrated there are many ways
   to do overlapping windows," Mr. Stead, Apple's general counsel, said,
   indicating that he believes those ways would still be afforded copyright
   protection.
--


Wayne Folta          (folta@cs.umd.edu  128.8.128.8)