rwp@cup.portal.com (07/13/90)
Would it be possible to release the names of the Secret Service men who were involved in the Steve Jackson affair, and that of the judge who issued the warrant? Since it is obviously legal to publish the name of private citizens who are innocent of a crime (until proven guilty), it would be nice to see the agents and judge accused of overzealousness (at least) or constitutional violations (at worst) enjoy the same level of publicity.
telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) (07/16/90)
Two observations -- The first, from a recent Usenet posting by Richard Stallman: Subject: Lotus Wins Copyright Infringement Suit Newsgroups: news.announce.important >In June 1990, Lotus won a suit against Paperback Software, a small >company that implemented a spreadsheet that talks to the user in the >same terms used by 1-2-3; they immediately went on to sue Borland about >Quattro, a spreadsheet whose usual interface has only a few similarities >to 1-2-3, claiming that these similarities in keystroke sequences are >enough to infringe. They have also sued SCO. (quoted only in part) It seems Mr. Kapor can be very aggressive when it comes to protecting what he believes is his property. Lotus sues quite frequently when they are offended, and they seem to be easily offended. I wonder why Mr. Kapor does not feel the same way about software which belongs to telcos? If the documentation for 1-2-3 was distributed far and wide you know Lotus would be all over your case in a minute ... why should the distribution of 911 documentation be different? Why are the people alleged to have ripped off 1-2-3 concepts to be held in contempt and sued, while those alleged to have distributed 911 stuff are treated as folk-heros? Maybe it has to do with whose money is involved, eh? For next: In the flood of press releases received here last week announcing the establishment of the Electronic Frontier Foundation, and their plans to defend the civil liberties of computerists -- as EFF and Kapor define those things -- not a word was said about a legal defense for Len Rose. You'd think he would be a prime candidate for their services. And while we are on the subject, Robert Morris could probably use a good appellate-level attorney about now. I guess as usual I don't know what I am talking about. Patrick Townson
telecom@eecs.nwu.edu (TELECOM Moderator) (07/19/90)
Several of you wrote to correct one important flaw in my op-ed the other day about Kapor, Lotus, lawsuits et al. Your response was that Kapor has not been affiliated with Lotus for a period of time, except as a stockholder, and that he has stated in the recent past that he did not agree with the legal actions Lotus was taking against people alleged to have ripped off 1-2-3. Apparently Kapor has no authority over anything they do there. Therefore my complaint of his hypocrisy was in error. At least a couple dozen messages pointed this out, and said nothing further, so I won't print them, since they all say virtually what I stated above, and it would be unfair to arbitrarily pick some and skip others. There were however a few messages with additional commentary on the work of the EFF and these will be excerpted and printed in an issue of the Digest on Thursday evening. Patrick Townson