Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!uflorida!kluge!serss0.fiu.edu
From: acmfiu@serss0.fiu.edu (ACMFIU)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple2
Subject: dislike of business practices
Message-ID: <3462@kluge.fiu.edu>
Date: 30 Apr 91 04:17:25 GMT
Sender: news@kluge.fiu.edu
Organization: Florida International University, Miami
Lines: 49

.from Dave Whitney
.
ACMFIU asks unknown about why he supports his GS after getting riled
up about Nintendo. ACMFIU suggests that Apple simply license their
stuff instead of suing the world.

What I'm about to say is MY OPINION ONLY and will attempt to stick
with the facts:

Microsoft *did* license technology from Apple in order to write
Windows. It is Apple's claim that version 2.0.3 and later versions of
Windows violates the license. That is why Apple is suing. It's a
different matter entirely. Apple isn't suing because it's fun - Apple
is suing because they believe that legal agreements have been broken.

Now whether or not agreements have been broken is another issue.
Whether or not Apple has the right to claim ownership is another
issue. I will stay out of the argument of Apple's claim to ownership
for obvious reasons.

If you don't like a company claiming ownership for what it develops
then you'd better stop buying software altogether. Write your own and
don't get any ideas from existing software or someone will sue *you*
(unless, of course, you license).

Dave Whitney	Microsoft Corp, Work Group Apps  dcw@goldilocks.lcs.mit.edu or
I wrote Z-Link and BinSCII - send me bug reports. {...}!uunet!microsoft!davewh
I only work here. All opinions herein aren't Bill's, they're mine.
.
. i don't know if i told unknown that it is OK for apple to license their
. user interface. i have no problems with licensing. i have every problem
. with licensing a user interface. i posted the reasons why certain items
. should be placed under copyright here before. since no one has said anything
. regarding that issue, i will then "assume" that what i posted is ok. then,
. if this is true, it should be quite apparent that copyright of any user
. interface does not follow suit with the definition of copyright.
.
. i understand why apple is suing microsoft, well most of the reasons anyway.
. i sometimes read conflicting reports as to why apple is suing microsoft
. so i don't have all the answers.
.
. i have no problem with a company claiming ownership for what it develops.
. is the macintosh interface proprietary. i think not. and yes, i am planning
. on writing all my own software, well most of it anyway. i have unlimited
. time so i can do anything i want. and, i have a C compiler and an
. assembler so i have that opportunity. i doubt the public will know of
. anything i make but i don't care.
.
. albert