Xref: utzoo comp.sys.next:379 comp.sys.mac:22194
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!att!osu-cis!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!eecae!cps3xx!rang
From: rang@cpsin3.cps.msu.edu (Anton Rang)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.next,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Mac OS on the NeXT?
Message-ID: <978@cps3xx.UUCP>
Date: 29 Oct 88 03:10:05 GMT
References: <6194@june.cs.washington.edu> <5782@hoptoad.uucp>
Sender: usenet@cps3xx.UUCP
Reply-To: rang@cpswh.cps.msu.edu (Anton Rang)
Organization: Michigan State University, Computer Science Dept.
Lines: 21
In-reply-to: gnu@hoptoad.uucp's message of 28 Oct 88 21:23:14 GMT

In article <5782@hoptoad.uucp>, John Gilmore (gnu@hoptoad.uucp) writes:
>It is possible for anyone to read 'Inside Mac' and write code that
>implements that interface, on any machine.  I'm sure Apple would
>seriously consider suing them, whether the suit was justified or not,
>but that's just asshole Apple.

Hmm...now I'm curious.  What are the limits on copyrights, patents,
trademarks (well, they're legal) etc.?  Is it possible to copyright:

  (1) A "programming language" (say, for a database's query language).
  (2) A library module (yes, right?).
  (3) The interface to a library module.
  (4) The *documentation* of the interface.

What's the difference between a "user interface" and a "program
interface" except for how visible they are?  Thoughts, anyone?

+---------------------------+------------------------+----------------------+
| Anton Rang (grad student) | "UNIX: Just Say No!"   | "Do worry...be SAD!" |
| Michigan State University | rang@cpswh.cps.msu.edu |                      |
+---------------------------+------------------------+----------------------+