Xref: utzoo comp.sys.amiga:46002 comp.sys.ibm.pc:40207 comp.sys.mac:44560
Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!samsung!uakari.primate.wisc.edu!ark1!nems!dtoa1!lumsdon
From: lumsdon@dtoa1.dt.navy.mil (Lumsdon)
Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga,comp.sys.ibm.pc,comp.sys.mac
Subject: Re: Copy rights?(was Re: Xerox sues Apple!!!)
Message-ID: <588@nems.dt.navy.mil>
Date: 18 Dec 89 19:55:27 GMT
References: <6767@tank.uchicago.edu> <14970@boulder.Colorado.EDU>
Sender: news@nems.dt.navy.mil
Reply-To: lumsdon@dtoa1.dt.navy.mil (Esther Lumsdon)
Followup-To: comp.sys.amiga
Organization: David Taylor Research Center, Bethesda, MD
Lines: 31

Yes, this is an intellectual property rights issue.

I disagree thoroughly with the person posting from UC at Boulder about
Apple taking risks to develop the Mac and Lisa GUI. Apple built upon
work done by _lots_ of other people (not just Xerox). Apple took advantage
of the fact that legal protection of software hadn't kept up with the
economic value of software, and didn't license technology from anyone,
nor give them credit for their work.

Then, when law had changed to improve legal protection of software,
Apple sued companies who had used Apple's developments in a similar
manner to how Apple had used previous developments.

In my humble opinion,
1.  Pepsi-style management has hurt Apple. The company was less litigous
before Sculley. Their approach to pricing their products hasn't changed.

2.  Apple is being a baby. They're saying "I can use other people, but
they can't get away with using me."  My response to them is boo hoo!

---------------
This part here is an aside.
A professor whom I like is friends with a longtime employee of Xerox,
who worked at PARC. Xerox's lawyers refused to let PARC staff attempt
to copyright any of their work because there just wasn't law to copyright
software back then.

---
Esther Lumsdon
David Taylor Research Center
Annapolis Lab  cm 301-267-3816   av 281-3816