Xref: utzoo misc.legal:4429 comp.sys.ibm.pc:13929 comp.sys.mac:14628 comp.sys.apple:5041 comp.sys.atari.st:8739 comp.sys.hp:650 comp.sys.amiga:17020
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att-cb!att-ih!pacbell!ames!umd5!purdue!gatech!udel!burdvax!sdcrdcf!ism780c!tim
From: tim@ism780c.UUCP (T.W."Tim" Smith, Knowledgian)
Newsgroups: misc.legal,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.apple,comp.sys.atari.st,comp.sys.hp,comp.sys.amiga
Subject: Re: Apple Challenges HP New Wave, MS-Windows, Potentially OS/2 PM
Message-ID: <9584@ism780c.UUCP>
Date: 31 Mar 88 01:47:17 GMT
References: <5480@well.UUCP> <5492@well.UUCP> <535@nunki.usc.edu> <512@cunixc.columbia.edu> <1302@uop.edu>
Reply-To: tim@ism780c.UUCP (T.W."Tim" Smith, Knowledgian)
Organization: Suction and Pressure Lab, California Institute of Lawsonomy
Lines: 55

In article <1302@uop.edu> miket@uop.edu (Mike Thompson) writes:
< perhaps give Apple the incentive to go after more look-alike
< windowing systems like those on Sun's, Amiga's, Atari's (to beat
< up GEM again!!!) and, of course, IBM's newer systems.

A point you all seem to be missing is that Microsoft's Windows *IS*
a Mac look-alike and that Sun's and Amiga's ( and MIT's, while we
are at it ) don't look like Mac windows.  And the Mac interface
doesn't feel like the Xerox one.

I would expect that Apple has a good chance to win against Microsoft
but would loose against Amiga for the same reason that Atari lost
when they sued the makers of Meteors ( an Asteroids clone ) and
that Bally ( I think ) won when they sued the makers of K.C.
Munchken ( a Pac-Man clone ).

In the Asteroids vs. Meteors case, what it came down to was that
the concept of shooting rocks in space can not be coverered by
the Atari copyright.  Asteroids is a minimal implementation of
that, and any implementatio of that basic ( unprotectable ) idea
was going to include Asteroids, so Atari was out of luck.

In K.C.Munchken vs Pac-Man, the concept that can't be protected
was going around a maze chasing monsters.  But Pac-Man had a lot
of elaborations on that idea that K.C. Munchken also had.  The
judge felt that there were too many points of similarity, so
Pac-Man won.

Looking at the various window systems in question here, I would
guess that the part you can't protect is the idea of windows,
icons, and mice.  But there are a lot of elaboration on the
basic idea that the maker of a window system must make, e.g.,
how do you grow windows, where do you put menus, how do you
close windows, do they tile or overlap, are icons used to
represent files only or do they also represent devices,
do you have a cute little trash can to throw files in, how
do you move windows, how do scroll bars work, etc.

Looking at Amiga windows, Sun windows, Mac windows, and
Xerox windows, we see four different answers to most of
these questions.  Looking at Microsoft windows, we see
an answer that we already saw: Mac windows.

If Apple wins this suit, I doubt it will be a major blow to
most manufactures of window based systems.  It will mean that
Microsoft will have to go out and design a windowing system
of their own, just like Sun and Amiga and Apple already did.

On the other hand, the law makes about as much sense to me
as the stock market, so take everything I say with a huge
grain of salt...
-- 
Tim Smith				tim@ism780c.isc.com
"I don't practice what I preach because I'm not the
                       kind of person I'm preaching to" -- J.R. "Bob" Dobbs