Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 4.3bsd-beta 6/6/85; site ucbvax.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!ucbvax!ucbcory!korn
From: korn@ucbcory.BERKELEY.EDU (Peter "Arrrgh" Korn)
Newsgroups: net.micro,net.micro.mac
Subject: Re: Apple suing people, protection of ideas
Message-ID: <10717@ucbvax.ARPA>
Date: Sat, 19-Oct-85 04:31:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: ucbvax.10717
Posted: Sat Oct 19 04:31:03 1985
Date-Received: Sun, 20-Oct-85 04:54:08 EDT
References: <429@imsvax.UUCP> <438@looking.UUCP> <583@bonnie.UUCP> <10678@ucbvax.ARPA> <516@crystal.UUCP>
Sender: usenet@ucbvax.ARPA
Reply-To: korn@ucbcory.UUCP (Peter "Arrrgh" Korn)
Organization: University of California, Berkeley
Lines: 49
Xref: watmath net.micro:12414 net.micro.mac:3043

In article <516@crystal.UUCP> bill@crystal.UUCP writes:
>>                                             For quite some time Jobs was
>> Chariman in name only, w/out any real powers.  Doubtless he wasn't really
>> happy in that capacity, and started thinking about a new venture.  He offered
>> to resign, then told some of his personal friends at Apple about his venture
>> and asked them if they were interested, then tried a second time to resign.
>
>I'm getting a little tired of this.  I'm sure we can all cheer for the
>guy who started Apple in the garage with Woz, but we've all gotten a little
>older and (I hope) wiser since then.
>
>When you are on the board of a corporation (chairman, in fact), you are
>in the same position of responsibility to the shareholders as a bank
>trust officer is to the people that have money entrusted to him.  There
>is a higher standard of behavior required, BOTH ethically and legally.
>If Jobs wants to take his money and go home, fine.  Remember, he
>sold a LOT of his stock.  If he wanted to run Apple forever, maybe he
>shouldn't have sold ANY of his original stock.
>

Unless I'm reading my articles wrong, Jobs got fed up with his "position of
responsibility" which gave him as much power as any other glamorous figurehead,
and over time decided to get out.  Yes, there is definitely a higher standard
of behavior that is required; but I too would be pretty dizzy after people
who I thought (admitedly though my own blindness) fully supported me cut
me off from my own corporation.  John Scully fully knew that Jobs might well
start a company on his own, and draw away a number of important/key engineers
at Apple to start this new company.  If this happened while Jobs was in such
an important position of *power* as the *chairman* of Apple (with the job of
keeping hands off everything), then it's a legal loophole in Apple's favor,
but who's morals are to be questioned here?

In no way does my heart to out to "poor, naive Jobs", don't get me wrong there.
I'm just disappointed that Apple is so bloodthursty to sue Jobs for something
they knew he would do when the took Apple away from him. They have the 
company, what the hell else do they want? Revenge for not making the Mac the
way they wanted it to be made? 
>
>I hope Apple Computer nails him to the wall.
>
I hope you find the new Apple more satisfying; I daresay we'll have a bit less
frustration and anger.

Peter Korn
cc-20%ucbcory@Berkeley

None of the above opinions/ideas/expressions/mannerisms/etc. are those of
whoever I might supposedly be representing (except possibly myself, of course).
And even then, there's some room for doubt!