Path: utzoo!telly!attcan!uunet!lll-winken!csd4.milw.wisc.edu!bbn!oberon!orion.cf.uci.edu!uci-ics!venera.isi.edu!raveling
From: raveling@venera.isi.edu (Paul Raveling)
Newsgroups: gnu.gcc
Subject: Re: GNU's not GNU...
Message-ID: <7937@venera.isi.edu>
Date: 5 Apr 89 16:38:22 GMT
References: <28354@apple.Apple.COM>
Reply-To: raveling@isi.edu (Paul Raveling)
Organization: Information Sciences Institute, Univ. of So. California
Lines: 30

In article <28354@apple.Apple.COM> jk@Apple.COM (John Kullmann) writes:
>
> ...  This crap about how Apple stole all this
>from Xerox etc. is not relevant.  The issue is the expression of the idea,
>not the idea.

	That's the point.  "Look and feel" represents a class of expressions,
	not an instance, and only instances are protected.  A publishing
	analogy would be attempting to copyright paperback books as look
	and feel.  It's the content of Gone With the Wind that's protected,
	not the medium for its expression.
	
	Protecting the look and feel is more dangerous than protecting
	paperback books because it would inhibit our ability to improve
	user interfaces by combining the best ideas from different
	"look and feel domains".  Beyond that, protecting look and feel
	would stifle our ability to simply produce products.

	--------------
	Does anyone have addresses for Apple executives?
	--------------

	I'd like to write to them to tell them that their actions are
	morally corrupt.  Perhaps if a few thousand others on
	the net also sent letters they might rethink their position.


----------------
Paul Raveling
Raveling@isi.edu