Path: utzoo!utgpu!jarvis.csri.toronto.edu!mailrus!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU!rms
From: rms@WHEATIES.AI.MIT.EDU (Richard Stallman)
Newsgroups: gnu.gcc
Subject: GNU's not GNU...
Message-ID: <8904042254.AA00430@sugar-bombs.ai.mit.edu>
Date: 4 Apr 89 22:54:16 GMT
References: <28354@apple.Apple.COM>
Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu
Distribution: gnu
Organization: GNUs Not Usenet
Lines: 24

Until two years ago, writing a program whose user interface imitated
an existing program was standard practice and was always considered
lawful.  User interfaces were considered utilitarian ideas, not
artistic expressions like "Gone with the Wind".  This situation was
satisfactory, but Apple, Lotus, etc. are trying to change it: to
establish a new kind monopoly.

No matter how this monopoly is formulated (is it an "idea" or an
"expression"), it still takes away programmers' traditional freedom.
It is still harmful for the users (no more compatibility) and it is
still a disaster for free software.

I'd happily accept donations from Apple or its employees, despite all
the harm they are otherwise doing to the GNU project, in the form of
money, or software that is generally useful.  Or bug reports.  In
other words, I'd accept anything which enables me to help GNU users in
general.

However, if I accepted a donation of Macintoshes, it would prove I was
simple minded.  A few machines more or less don't make much difference
to how successful GNU will ultimately be.  Defeating "look and feel"
is essential to keep free software legal.

Does anyone have suggestions for new ways to carry on the fight?