Forum unknown
· Hot News & Rumors
#Latest Apple Lawsuit
25 messages in this thread
To those who might not have heard, our friends at Apple have instituted
another lawsuit. (I guess that their lawyers don't have anything else to do
at the moment.) The gist of their claim is that HP & Microsoft have
violated some exclusive right that Apple has on the mouse/icon presentation
and on-screen representation. Interestingly, they did not even mention
ATARI (ST) or our beloved AMIGA's.
Most people in business don't know from an Amiga or an ST nor, at this
stage of the game does Apple care about Commodore or Atari. Apple is
trying to protect itself from loss of business due to people using the IBM
presentation manager based on Microsoft Windows under OS2. Certainly, if
the court were to find that Apple has a case Commodore and Atari could be
forced to license their screen displays from Apple. The thing that's so
ridiculous about it all (if you've followed the history of windowed
presentation and mouse use) is that all of this technology began at XEROX
Palo Alto Research Center and that's where Steve Jobs took the idea for the
Mac from. Unless Xerox placed all this stuff in the public domain their the
one's who really created the technology and should probably own the rights
to it. People have said this before, but, to the best of my knowledge,
Xerox has never spoken to the issue.
The issue isn't the interface, it's the 'look and feel' of the
interface. Read my other message in this thread about the Atari and Amiga.
The Atari is definately save, the Amiga is also probably safe from any
lawsuit by Apple. Apple licensed, or outright bought the rights to the
interface developed by Xerox…that's why you don't see Xerox getting
upset.
The issue isn't the interface, it's the 'look and feel' of the
interface. Read my other message in this thread about the Atari and Amiga.
The Atari is definately save, the Amiga is also probably safe from any
lawsuit by Apple. Apple licensed, or outright bought the rights to the
interface developed by Xerox…that's why you don't see Xerox getting
upset.
Most people in business don't know from an Amiga or an ST nor, at this
stage of the game does Apple care about Commodore or Atari. Apple is
trying to protect itself from loss of business due to people using the IBM
presentation manager based on Microsoft Windows under OS2. Certainly, if
the court were to find that Apple has a case Commodore and Atari could be
forced to license their screen displays from Apple. The thing that's so
ridiculous about it all (if you've followed the history of windowed
presentation and mouse use) is that all of this technology began at XEROX
Palo Alto Research Center and that's where Steve Jobs took the idea for the
Mac from. Unless Xerox placed all this stuff in the public domain their the
one's who really created the technology and should probably own the rights
to it. People have said this before, but, to the best of my knowledge,
Xerox has never spoken to the issue.
I'm quite sure that Apple didn't come up with the mouse/icon idea anyway.
Wasn't it Xerox or someone?
I'm quite sure that Apple didn't come up with the mouse/icon idea anyway.
Wasn't it Xerox or someone?
They didn't mention Atari because Atari is using GEM from DRI for
their interface, and have already sued DRI (and settled out of court) over
that interface. Part of the settlement with Atari was that versions of GEM
already released did not have to be 'recalled' so the Atari version is 'ok'
in that respect. I doubt they'd get very far with a suit against CBM over
the Amiga interface. The Amiga doesn't have the 'look and feel' of the Mac
which is the basis of Apple's suits. No one would confuse an Amiga screen
shot with an Apple screen shot even using the '10 foot rule' (stand back 10
feet and look at the screen shots and tell me if the look alike).
Hmm… I wonder if CBM would have a case for suing Apple for 'look & feel'
of a windowing interface on a colour screen? 😉
Yes…and I wonder if CBS could sue NBC and ABC over the 'look and
feel' of their newscasts!
I could see Apple getting upset over extremely close duplicates of
their workbench (from the user's point of view)…but beyond that, it's a
joke (to me, obviously not to Apple). Admittedly, the DRI's GEM workbench
was very close the to Mac workbench, but the newer version is only slightly
modified…and that's the result of the settlement between Apple and DRI so I
suspect you won't see anything against the Amiga…since it's not even close
to the Mac interface.
Also, DRI was not in the finacial shape to battle Apple in the courts.
Personally, I'd like to see IBM's Lawyers get involved since IBM and
Microsoft are in cahoots over OS/2. I think Apple needs a good trouncing.
Also, DRI was not in the finacial shape to battle Apple in the courts.
Personally, I'd like to see IBM's Lawyers get involved since IBM and
Microsoft are in cahoots over OS/2. I think Apple needs a good trouncing.
Yes…and I wonder if CBS could sue NBC and ABC over the 'look and
feel' of their newscasts!
I could see Apple getting upset over extremely close duplicates of
their workbench (from the user's point of view)…but beyond that, it's a
joke (to me, obviously not to Apple). Admittedly, the DRI's GEM workbench
was very close the to Mac workbench, but the newer version is only slightly
modified…and that's the result of the settlement between Apple and DRI so I
suspect you won't see anything against the Amiga…since it's not even close
to the Mac interface.
Hmm… I wonder if CBM would have a case for suing Apple for 'look & feel'
of a windowing interface on a colour screen? 😉
They didn't mention Atari because Atari is using GEM from DRI for
their interface, and have already sued DRI (and settled out of court) over
that interface. Part of the settlement with Atari was that versions of GEM
already released did not have to be 'recalled' so the Atari version is 'ok'
in that respect. I doubt they'd get very far with a suit against CBM over
the Amiga interface. The Amiga doesn't have the 'look and feel' of the Mac
which is the basis of Apple's suits. No one would confuse an Amiga screen
shot with an Apple screen shot even using the '10 foot rule' (stand back 10
feet and look at the screen shots and tell me if the look alike).
David,
Whoops…I said 'part of the settlement with Atari'…I meant 'part
of the settlement with DRI'…
Don
Don,
It just seems to get my goat that Apple somehow thinks that it owns every
innovation in the computer industry that it has used. It's hard to fathom
their reasoning, other than "let's try to sue somebody and get their money."
This one is particularly annoying because:
1. Apple did not originate the idea to begin with.
2. The typical mode of progress in the computer industry is to "build a
better mousetrap (pun intended). If Apple's view prevails, it will send
shudders down the backs of most software developers.
We also have Apple to thank for the following innovations:
A special diskette format that nobody else in the world uses.
A DOS that just barely functions (Apple DOS)
Closed system hardware (MAC)
I am happy to say that I have not ever (knowingly) purchased an Apple
computer product. I may not be able to continue that practice if they prevail
in their position.
If Apple want's to make more money, why don't they improve on their idea to
capture more of the market (as the targets in the lawsuit are trying to do)
instead of trying to inhibit progress by suing (because it's easier to
convince a judge than to do the development). Apple's past legal shenanigans
make them, in my mind, one of the most "whiny" corporations around.
Speaking of lawsuits, I hear that there are several clone makers sitting on
their PS/2 clones waiting for the first one to hit the market. IBM said
they'll sue if someone releases a PS/2 clone.
IBM already sued a company (AST ??) for putting a /2 after the product
name. IBM appears to want to copyright the /2.
And once upon a time there was a company named Zilog who tried to copyright
the letter Z……
I read that IBM was more interested in getting a licensing fee for the PS/2
clones than stopping their inevitable release. The things that have been in
EE Times indicated that the people who made the clone chip set didn't seem to
be worried.
I read that IBM was more interested in getting a licensing fee for the PS/2
clones than stopping their inevitable release. The things that have been in
EE Times indicated that the people who made the clone chip set didn't seem to
be worried.
Tandy is about to release a microchannel system; I've seen it, it seems to
work quite well (considering the crippling internals, that is to say) Perhaps
they'll be first, this time. –Ben–
Speaking of lawsuits, I hear that there are several clone makers sitting on
their PS/2 clones waiting for the first one to hit the market. IBM said
they'll sue if someone releases a PS/2 clone.
IBM already sued a company (AST ??) for putting a /2 after the product
name. IBM appears to want to copyright the /2.
And once upon a time there was a company named Zilog who tried to copyright
the letter Z……
Don,
It just seems to get my goat that Apple somehow thinks that it owns every
innovation in the computer industry that it has used. It's hard to fathom
their reasoning, other than "let's try to sue somebody and get their money."
This one is particularly annoying because:
1. Apple did not originate the idea to begin with.
2. The typical mode of progress in the computer industry is to "build a
better mousetrap (pun intended). If Apple's view prevails, it will send
shudders down the backs of most software developers.
We also have Apple to thank for the following innovations:
A special diskette format that nobody else in the world uses.
A DOS that just barely functions (Apple DOS)
Closed system hardware (MAC)
I am happy to say that I have not ever (knowingly) purchased an Apple
computer product. I may not be able to continue that practice if they prevail
in their position.
If Apple want's to make more money, why don't they improve on their idea to
capture more of the market (as the targets in the lawsuit are trying to do)
instead of trying to inhibit progress by suing (because it's easier to
convince a judge than to do the development). Apple's past legal shenanigans
make them, in my mind, one of the most "whiny" corporations around.
David,
Whoops…I said 'part of the settlement with Atari'…I meant 'part
of the settlement with DRI'…
Don