Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sm.unisys.com!ism780c!darryl
From: darryl@ism780c.isc.com (Darryl Richman)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Apple gets favorable ruling
Keywords: Apple, Microsoft, lawsuits, HP
Message-ID: <25307@ism780c.isc.com>
Date: 28 Mar 89 17:05:10 GMT
References: <6271@bsu-cs.UUCP> <1068@Portia.Stanford.EDU> <37812@think.UUCP> <568@madnix.UUCP> <564@apexepa.UUCP> <27940@apple.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: darryl@ism780c.UUCP (Darryl Richman)
Distribution: usa
Organization: Interactive Systems Corp., Santa Monica CA
Lines: 25

The most important point of this suit is not whether Windows 2.03/New
Wave looks too much like a Mac.  What's important here is for the
judges and lawyers to find a clear expression of what a copyright on a
computer can cover.  There must be a balance between copyrighting the
world (and therefore stifling competition and creativity) and no
protection at all (and therefore stifling creativity and competition)!
It's like the old joke--What's the difference between capitalism and
communism?  With capitalism, man exploits man;  with communism, it's
the other way around.

When congress wrote the recent copyright law they purposly left it
vague because they knew that they didn't know beans about the subject.
So they left it to the judicial branch to figure out.  *They* haven't
done well either.  Apple is particularly concerned because they stand
to lose a great deal of R&D budget (and competitive edge) if copyright
protection doesn't go far enough.  But they themselves will be unhappy
if it goes too far--how outrageous do you think Adobe could get about
postscript, for example?  The question is, where is the line?

		--Darryl Richman
-- 
Copyright (c) 1989 Darryl Richman     The views expressed are the author's alone
darryl@ism780c.isc.com 		       INTERACTIVE Systems Corp.-A Kodak Company
  "For every problem, there is a solution that is simple, elegant, and wrong."
	-- H. L. Mencken