timothym@tekigm2.TEK.COM (Timothy D Margeson) (03/25/88)
Hi,
Okay, my two cents on the Apple vs. HP/Microsoft. Some have mentioned that
IBM should also get into the suit, offering support in the attorneys ring.
This sounds good on the surface, until you realize a small point in the
suit filed. A jury.
What this means is that all Apple has to do is prove, in layman's terms, and
layman's eyes, the MAC interface and Windows 2.X and New Wave look alike.
This is all that is required to win a copyright case.
Now, add to this trial by jury a small, helpless company like Apple, being
robbed of it's profits by the GIANTs MicroSoft, Hewlett Packard (and just
think if IBM were invovled). Oh, that poor Apple (say's the jury).
So, you can be sure Apple will want momma joe, a farmers wife from Froth,
Kentucky on the jury, but not tom, a computer literate from Houston, Texas.
Be sure, Apple WILL be able to select the jury, or at least deny ANY of those
possible jury members whom might understand the real differences they should
be looking for in a copyright case.
Apple probable will win this case, but even if they don't, they can then use
the case as a precent and copy like hell anything they want. So, it's a win
win, case for Apple, and lose lose for HP and MS. IBM too for that matter.
A third benefit from the case, win or lose, is that Apple will slow down any
developement of Presentation Manager, 3rt party Windows applications and the
like.
Apple is not being dumb by any means. Also remember they won a similar suit
against Digital Research. SO a precent in Apples favor already exists. Another
case, similar to this, was Microstuff (Crosstalk) vs. Mirror (a Crosstalk
clone). Microstuff won on the look and feel aspects of the case, lost on the
aspects. So Mirror was changed so that the screens didn't look like Crosstalks,
but everything else worked the same. Including the script language.
--
Tim Margeson (206)253-5240
PO Box 3500 d/s C1-937 @@ 'Who said that?'
Vancouver, WA. 98668
{amd..hplabs}cae780!tektronix!tekigm2!timothym (this changes daily)brent@rtech.UUCP (Brent Williams) (03/29/88)
From article <2722@tekigm2.TEK.COM>, by timothym@tekigm2.TEK.COM (Timothy D Margeson): > Now, add to this trial by jury a small, helpless company like Apple, being ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ Come on. The quarter just ended, apple announced $1 billion in revenue. I bet Hewlett Packard is only about $6-8 billion per year, not that much bigger than Apple. Also, microsoft only about $300 million. They might try to capitalize on the "2 guys in a garage image" but an attorney for the other guys would have no trouble pulling this apart. > robbed of it's profits by the GIANTs MicroSoft, Hewlett Packard (and just > think if IBM were invovled). Oh, that poor Apple (say's the jury). > > So, you can be sure Apple will want momma joe, a farmers wife from Froth, > Kentucky on the jury, but not tom, a computer literate from Houston, Texas. > Be sure, Apple WILL be able to select the jury, or at least deny ANY of those > possible jury members whom might understand the real differences they should > be looking for in a copyright case. Recent changes to peremptory challenges only permit a fixed number of peremptory challenges per side. Thus, out of 20 possible jurors, they may only be able to bounce 8 for non-legal related reasons. (I don't know the numbers, but they're not as lenient as they used to be.) > > Apple probable will win this case, but even if they don't, they can then use Not bloody likely. > the case as a precent and copy like hell anything they want. So, it's a win > win, case for Apple, and lose lose for HP and MS. IBM too for that matter. > A third benefit from the case, win or lose, is that Apple will slow down any > developement of Presentation Manager, 3rt party Windows applications and the > like. Presentation manager doesn't need anybody else to slow it down; they seem to be perfectly able to shoot themselves in the foot. Besides, all the spate of idiotic jury decisions means that the *REAL* court decisions are made by an appellate court, usually a panel of 3 old, crusty judges that are a lot harder to hoodwink than a bunch of jurors. I've heard that about 95% of the $1million plus damage awards are reversed on appeal. > > Apple is not being dumb by any means. Also remember they won a similar suit > against Digital Research. SO a precent in Apples favor already exists. Another They did not win any such suit. Their suit was settled out of court. Therefore, no precedent was established. Precedent only arises from a decision. > case, similar to this, was Microstuff (Crosstalk) vs. Mirror (a Crosstalk > clone). Microstuff won on the look and feel aspects of the case, lost on the > aspects. So Mirror was changed so that the screens didn't look like Crosstalks, But this was because Mirror was an *exact* clone of crosstalk, and because Mirror advocated openly in their advertising that they were a REPLACEMENT for Crosstalk. Not that they had a product embodying many of the same features, but an EXACT interchangeable replacement. Nowhere does Microsoft or HP come even close to spouting the same thing. > but everything else worked the same. Including the script language. Yes. This moves them back from being a "copycat" to being "compatible". Besides, the suit only covered the screen layout. Programming languages can't be copyrighted. Look at all the trouble Postscript got themselves into because they started calling Postscript a programming language, in their own manuals. You can't use the name but you can write a compatible language. They won the battle but lose the war. -- -brent williams Relational Technology, Inc. 1080 Marina Village Parkway {amdahl,sun,mtxinu,cpsc6a,hoptoad} Alameda, CA 94501 !rtech!brent (415)-769-1400
davidsen@steinmetz.steinmetz.ge.com (William E. Davidsen Jr) (03/30/88)
In article <1886@rtech.UUCP> brent@rtech.UUCP (Brent Williams) writes: > > Besides, all the spate of idiotic jury decisions means that the > *REAL* court decisions are made by an appellate court, usually > a panel of 3 old, crusty judges that are a lot harder to hoodwink > than a bunch of jurors. I've heard that about 95% of the $1million > plus damage awards are reversed on appeal. Excuse me? I assume that this is a typo and you meant 'reduced' rather than reversed. If 95% of the suits were reversed everybody would be trying to lose... When I was on jury duty the judge told us that he couldn't throw out a dollar amount unless it "offended the sensibilities of the court." My impression from talking to lawyers is that many cases get settled for less than the jury finding because neither party want to have an appeal. -- bill davidsen (wedu@ge-crd.arpa) {uunet | philabs | seismo}!steinmetz!crdos1!davidsen "Stupidity, like virtue, is its own reward" -me
frank@zen.UUCP (Frank Wales) (04/01/88)
In article <1886@rtech.UUCP> brent@rtech.UUCP (Brent Williams) writes: >From article <2722@tekigm2.TEK.COM>, by timothym@tekigm2.TEK.COM > (Timothy D Margeson): >> Now, add to this trial by jury a small, helpless company like Apple, being > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^ > Come on. The quarter just ended, apple announced $1 billion in revenue. > I bet Hewlett Packard is only about $6-8 billion per year, not > that much bigger than Apple. Also, microsoft only about $300 million. > They might try to capitalize on the "2 guys in a garage image" > but an attorney for the other guys would have no trouble pulling this > apart. In fact, since Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard were the original Silicon Valley "two guys in a garage" (now a museum), maybe HP could countersue Apple for ripping off how they got started. Then again, I think HP have more decency than to try. -- Frank Wales, Development Engineer, [frank@zen.uucp<->mcvax!zen.co.uk!frank] Zengrange Ltd., Greenfield Rd., Leeds, ENGLAND, LS9 8DB. (+44) 532 489048 x220
campbelr@hpsel1.HP.COM (Bob Campbell) (04/05/88)
> In fact, since Bill Hewlett and Dave Packard were the original Silicon > Valley "two guys in a garage" (now a museum), maybe HP could countersue > Apple for ripping off how they got started. The Palo Alto Garage is a California Historical Landmark, but last I read was still in use by a flower cart owner. Bob Campbell Some times I wish that I could stop you from Hewlett Packard talking, when I hear the silly things you say. hplabs!hpda!campbelr - Elvis Costello