Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!harvard!husc6!talcott!panda!genrad!decvax!ittatc!dcdwest!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!burdvax!bpa!sjuvax!drexel!hvrford!k_lim
From: k_lim@hvrford.UUCP
Newsgroups: net.micro.atari16
Subject: re: writing to Apple about MacCartridge
Message-ID: <157@hvrford.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 21-Apr-86 16:55:57 EDT
Article-I.D.: hvrford.157
Posted: Mon Apr 21 16:55:57 1986
Date-Received: Fri, 2-May-86 21:09:22 EDT
References: <8604060607.AA07358@ucbvax.berkeley.edu> <2093@uwmacc.UUCP>
Organization: Haverford College, Haverford, PA
Lines: 24
Summary: MacCartridge and Apple

In article <2093@uwmacc.UUCP>, demillo@uwmacc.UUCP (Rob DeMillo @ Madison
Academic Computer Center) writes:
> A question about MacCartridge:
> 
>    Did I miss something? Why should *anyone* care about Apple's approval?
> If the thing was made *wothout* any Apple software or hardware, what
> legal claim do they have to prevent this fellow from selling them? 

	As I understand it, MacCartridge is designed to use the Macintosh ROMs.
This *is* use of Apple's software, and so needs to be approved by Apple, unless
you can get their ROMs through another source.

> Apple tried to stop distribution of GEMDOS, and they lost...and they
> should have, look-alikes and compatable components are *not* copyright
> infrigements...at least not the last time I looked....

	Again, from what I've heard, some changes *did* have to be made to
GEMDOS as a result of an out-of-court settlement between DRI and Apple.  The
current precedents in U.S. law indicate that copying of the "look and feel"
of software *is* a copyright infringement.

-- 
Kian-Tat Lim, Haverford College, Haverford, PA
BITNET: K_LIM@HVRFORD   UUCP: ...!{allegra, burdvax}!sjuvax!hvrford!k_lim