Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!mailrus!cornell!biar!trebor From: trebor@biar.UUCP (Robert J Woodhead) Newsgroups: comp.sys.mac Subject: Re: Fwd: Xerox - Apple Computer Suit -2- Message-ID: <986@biar.UUCP> Date: 18 Dec 89 01:07:25 GMT References: <1989Dec17.184851.7635@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu> Organization: Biar Games, Inc. Lines: 30 rob@uokmax.ecn.uoknor.edu (Robert K Shull) writes: >In article mr2t+@andrew.cmu.edu (Michael Tod Rose) writes: >> In addition, the Xerox lawsuit claims that Apple's acts constitute >>unfair competition and unfair business practices that have caused Xerox >i.e. Apple had a product and Xerox didn't. Whatever your feelings about this particular case, it seems to me that Apple is only getting what they have been dishing out. Apple was mainly responsible for the ``look and feel'' legal concept, and nobody denies that a large part of the basics of the windowing interface in general, and the Mac implementation in particular, were developed and tested at Xerox PARC. If Apple wants to go around suing people for appropriating their ideas, such as pull-down menus, window titles, and other Apple developed user interface concepts, they should expect to get sued by people whose ideas they appropriated (eg: Xerox). They can't have it both ways. If Apple is wise, they would pony up $10 or $20 million to Xerox for a license fee -- because it helps legitimize their position in re: look and feel. Why didn't they? It seems that the risk they may see is that if they pay Xerox, Xerox will go around licensing everyone else for windowing systems; and these people will wave the licenses in front of Apple when Apple's lawyers come calling. -- Robert J Woodhead, Biar Games, Inc. !uunet!biar!trebor | trebor@biar.UUCP Announcing TEMPORAL EXPRESS. For only $999,999.95 (per page), your message will be carefully stored, then sent back in time as soon as technologically possible. TEMEX - when it absolutely, postively has to be there yesterday!