Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!burl!ulysses!allegra!mit-eddie!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!rochester!ritcv!cci632!ccird2!rb
From: rb@ccird2.UUCP (Rex Ballard)
Newsgroups: net.legal,net.micro.atari16
Subject: Re: Using Apple Macintosh roms on non-Apple machines
Message-ID: <794@ccird2.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 25-Apr-86 14:52:36 EDT
Article-I.D.: ccird2.794
Posted: Fri Apr 25 14:52:36 1986
Date-Received: Sun, 27-Apr-86 07:26:53 EDT
References: <959@well.UUCP>
Reply-To: rb@ccird2.UUCP (Rex Ballard)
Organization: CCI Telephony Systems Group,  Roch, NY
Lines: 68
Keywords: Infringing ROM Copyrights
Xref: watmath net.legal:3330 net.micro.atari16:564

In article <959@well.UUCP> tenney@well.UUCP (Glenn S. Tenney) writes:
>What is a line eater?
>
>A company has developed some software and a cartridge for the
>Atari ST computer that allows Apple Macintosh roms to run on the 
>Atari ST.  They take official Apple roms and plug them into their
>cartridge and then their software lets the ST run Macintosh software.
>
>I hope that net.legal is the proper place for this discussion (it has
>been on net.micro.atari16).  Some of the questions are:
>1.  Is there any copyright infringement?  I believe there is none, but
>    the developer thought Apple might so claim.

This depends on whether Apple is depending solely on copyright protection
or a liscence agreement.  If copyright is the only restriction, then
Apple dealers, who have purchased the ROMs legally, may resell them
to anyone who wants to buy them legally.  However the upgrade policy
for the Mac to Mac+ upgrade stipulates $$ PLUS the ROM.  Apple already
gives service centers ROMs with credit/charge policies.  It is quite
possible that Apple Dealers would be perfectly willing and able to
sell you an Apple ROM for $1000 or more.

>2.  Can Apple suddenly claim the roms as proprietary?  The roms are
>    evidently availble (officially) for somthing like US$195.

They don't have to.  They are already covered by well documented copyright
notices.  They have probably also registered the copyright.

>3.  If Apple tries to restrict this product wouldn't they expose
>    themselves to restraint of trade claims?

This would be a problem ONLY if the "bundling" were a restraint of trade
in that it was impossible to get the same functionality, product, software,
... for the other machine, and that the purpose was to maintian artificially
high prices.  Atari's low price may enable customers who buy both Apples
and STs to file such complaints.

Some important cases are the NOVA case, the IBM "bundling" case, and the
Apple vs. Fanklin case.  In the latter case, Franklin attempted to prove
"restraint of trade" via the ROMs, and lost.

Personally, I would hope that they could come up with an object code
translator, as Landon did for the Amiga, or maybe Atari will come up
with translaters to go Atari-> Mac, and Atari -> Amiga.  Another possibility
is that a third party such as DRI, MicroWare, Metacomco or ??? could come up
with operating systems which would provide the best functionality of all these
machines and still be tranparent to application software.  Possible candidates
include Concurrent GEMDOS (is it coming?), OS-9 68K,  Tripos, GNU with VDI,
Windows, UNIX, or ???.  At this point, it looks like OS-9 will be the first
contender.

There is too big a potential market for "compatibility" between these machines,
and too many new peripherals (CD-ROMs, WORMs,...) which can't be released
in a timely fashion if four separate interfaces and systems must be supported.

The "componant computer system", like the "componant stereo system" will
be an important factor in the future.  Manufacturers may produce "compact"
versions, but users will still want to plug in additional "black boxes"
that shouldn't need to know what computer they are connected to.  This
also includes software.

Hopefully, by the end of the year, this will have all sorted itself out,
and we will be able to "Mix and Match" componants from a variety of
manufacturers.  Mac+ is the first to "Throw the gauntlet" with built-in
SCSI.  IBM dealers and users are already beginning to follow suit.

Interestingly enough, Atari, with their "lowball price" and "high power"
stand to gain the most from such a situation.