Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!mit-eddie!apollo!eldred
From: eldred@apollo.uucp (Eric Eldred )
Newsgroups: comp.sys.apple
Subject: Re: BOYCOTT APPLE
Message-ID: <3b26143e.eec8@apollo.uucp>
Date: 29 Mar 88 20:50:00 GMT
References: <663@csm9a.UUCP> <64800028@convex>
Organization: Apollo Computer, Chelmsford, Mass.
Lines: 53

.
>Let's get back to discussing the Apple II, which is what this discussion
>is supposed to be all about.
>                            -Russell Buyse.

Okay, what about the AppleWorks user interface?  Isn't that supposed
to be the single largest selling  program?  Did Apple retain any
copyright or license rights before transferring it to Claris?  Has
Apple ever spoken with Apple developers about not using this user
interface in their own programs, or licensing it if they do?  Did
Apple buy the rights to the user interface from its independent
developers?

I believe the Macintosh interface (what used to be called Lisa
Technology by Apple) now comes under the rubric of system software,
which Apple retained when it started up Claris.

Then what about Apple's rights to DOS?  Apple never exercised its rights
to prevent users from copying it and handing out disks including DOS
3.2 or 3.3 to other users, although more recently I believe it has
attempted to caution user groups about the practice.  This approach
strongly contrasted with IBM's proprietary approach to PC-DOS.

Let's hope that some good things will come out of the lawsuits, 
especially the one against HP (the disagreement with Microsoft might
boil down to a contract reading rather than a copyright infringement).
The legal status in these matters has been unclear, and now we will
be forced to take into account some judicial rulings since we users
and software producers haven't been able to resolve the issues by
ourselves.

My own personal opinion--and I am an Apple ][ and Mac owner from 
'way back--is that reverse engineering is an honorable tradition
distinct from mere copying.  In the latter category I would put such
things as the first Franklin ROM, the recently-squashed Brazilian Mac,
and the first DR GEM.  In the former I would include the Phoenix IBM
BIOS clone, digital calculators, BASIC, the original VisiCalc interface,
and the Smalltalk user interface (which has been reconstructed by 
so many people surely Xerox lost any rights long ago just by not
claiming anything).  I'll leave it to the courts to determine if
Windows or NewWave fall in the first or second category.

Apple would make it easier on everyone else if it decided to license
some of the technology for the reasonable price many would be willing
to pay to make their stuff compatible.  When it does license the
technology, it might want to sit down and talk about any feelings
the license agreement has been violated, before it starts serving
subpoenas.

DISCLAIMER:  My employer is a competitor to Apple, but has no knowledge
             of my statements.  I have no knowledge of my company's
             position on these matters, if any.  But don't boycott
             Apple, just look at how much better Apollo is!