guest@ccivax.UUCP (What's in a name ?) (10/22/85)
The opinions expressed below are mine, and not necessarily those of my employer. Just out of curiosity, does anybody know what the "Liscence Fee" for the "Look and Feel of a Macintosh" should be? What did DRI agree to? Assuming that the code is not a direct copy, and the displays are not exact duplicates, and the functionality is significantly different, what should DRI be paying for, and how much? If Apple only wanted $1 a copy, they would get the "research payback" and DRI would not be that adversely affected. If Apple wanted $1000/copy just to keep competitors from charging less for their machines, Apple should be slapped with an anti-trust suit. Of course, if DRI pays for that "Liscence", they should be able to say it has "The Look and Feel of a Macintosh" in all their advertising. Of course, so should their customers (Atari, IBM,...) if they choose to include GEM. Did DRI mention this before the settlement? This "Look and Feel" copyrighting started back in the "Pac-Man" days when the only protection for software was "Non-Disclosure" agreements. If the displays, windows, or even the features were IDENTICAL in some way, then their would be a clear case of copyright violation, but this is not the case with GEM. DRI has settled out of court, but how long before VAR's and OEM's get the same treatment from "Big Name" companies? What other "Looks and Feels" might be grounds for a lawsuit? Spreadsheets? Lotus 1-2-3?, Hierarchial File Systems?, full screen word processors? Seems to me, that when the Computer Industry was just Mainframes, Minis, and hobbyists, nobody worried too much. Now that the pie has gotten bigger, the "Big Boys" have forgotten their roots. Maybe some of those first contributors to the Apple should get lawyers. The "Garage Shops" had better get lawyers too. You never know who might decide you copied their "Look and Feel". I hope DRI does change GEM for the better, maybe they can find some ways of improving on the MAC interface. The MAC interface is not mature enough to become a "Standard" and maybe this is just the incentive to improve it, maybe Apple and DRI (and others?) will develope an even better interface as a joint venture (DRI as agreed to do work for Apple) and extend the "Mice and Windows" environments to languages. Maybe they'll add macros to the DRAW programs. Maybe they'll come up with a standard data format for graphics. I don't object to the suit itself, only the grounds. But isn't filing suit over "Look and Feel" is just a little crazy?