Xref: utzoo comp.sys.mac:15722 comp.sys.ibm.pc:15298
Path: utzoo!mnetor!uunet!husc6!think!ames!lll-lcc!well!hrh
From: hrh@well.UUCP (Harry Henderson)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac,comp.sys.ibm.pc
Subject: Re: The Lawsuit, Standardization, and Whiny DOS Users...
Message-ID: <5884@well.UUCP>
Date: 5 May 88 17:48:59 GMT
References: <8685@eleazar.Dartmouth.EDU> <5823@well.UUCP> <10600@steinmetz.ge.com> <5836@well.UUCP> <1252@uokmax.UUCP>
Reply-To: hrh@well.UUCP (Harry Henderson)
Organization: Whole Earth 'Lectronic Link, Sausalito, CA
Lines: 18
Summary: The difference is licensing

In article <1252@uokmax.UUCP> rob@uokmax.UUCP (Robert K. Shull) writes:
>
>
>What about IBM and the PS/2? They've announced their intention to "use
>litigation as a competitive tactic" to protect their design. Is this right?
>If so, what's the difference between this and Apple's suit? If not, how far
>is it right to go in duplicating someone else's design? How are we supposed
>to figure out the limits?

IBM offers *licenses* for its PS/2 patents, and several companies such
as Tandy will be producing PS/2 compatibles using these licenses.
Try and get a license from Apple to manufacture Mac clones ...


-- 
The opinions expressed are my own, but you're welcome to share them.
Harry Henderson (freelance technical editor/writer).
{pacbell,hplabs,lll-crg,hoptoad,apple}!well!hrh