ken@s.cc.purdue.edu (Ken Harward) (04/04/89)
I'm posting this for a friend. Hope it is still timely... --------------------------------------------------------------------------- I was becoming quite confused by the various articles concerning the meaning of the initial ruling by the judge in the Apple/Microsoft case. A front- page article in PC Week of 3/27, though, presents a clearer summary--and a different interpretation of the ruling: "After releasing a proposed judgment that seemed strongly to favor Apple, U.S. District Judge William Schwarzer issued a final ruling last week that Microsoft has the right to use elements of Apple's Macintosh interface, not just in Windows 1.0--for which Microsoft had a license from Apple--but in future products as well. "The judge, however, also ruled that Windows 2.03, over which Apple sued Microsoft, has elements not covered by the existing Microsoft license." Very interesting... The article then goes on to say that this ruling sets the stage for a second round of arguments which could be very important to the "course of graphics interfaces on PCs". Further: "Microsoft must now show that parts of Windows 2.03 not included in Windows 1.0--specifically overlapping windows--came from sources other than the Macintosh. Apple must demonstrate that it holds a copyright on those Windows elements." The article continues with statements from the various legal counsels, including HP (remember them? :-), which is siding with Microsoft. There is also speculation that if Microsoft wins the case that the door would be open for Macintosh clones. I'm not so sure on that one given the recent discussion about the difficulty of reverse-engineering the Mac ROMs. Check out the article for the complete scoop... Kent Sullivan -- Ken Harward ken@s.cc.purdue.edu *************************************************************************