rms@AI.MIT.EDU (06/17/89)
Some people have recently posted the standard argument that no one could have jobs improving user interfaces without user interface copyright; and supposedly therefore we would have worse interfaces. (Since this argument is so characteristic of American business ideology, there is no need to spell it out if you want to repeat it; just saying "standard argument #1" will suffice.) The facts show this is an exaggeration, at the very least. Large amounts of work were done on user interfaces in the 1970's, despite the general agreement that they could not be copyrighted. The standard argument also ignores the fact that user interface improvements can be, and often are, made as part of a project which is primarily development. Businesses can fund this without any special privileges or monopolies. These improvements also do not require people hired specifically and only to work on user interfaces; programmers working on a project will often have ideas for improving the interface. Hiring people for interface design alone is only one way to develop interfaces: it is not essential. However, even without copyright, there were a considerable number of people working specifically on user interfaces during the 1970's. Since much work on user interfaces is incremental, it would be hampered by copyright. Thus, copyright could actually reduce the amount of interface development. Also, even if people see how to improve part of an interface, they may not see how to replace every aspect: such partial improvements would be illegal under copyright.
dsmythe@cup.portal.com (dave l smythe) (06/19/89)
Sorry to ask a non-gcc question, but ... Suppose you were to get a copyright on an expression of an idea, such as a menu. Is the expression the screen image or the code that implements it or the design (assuming it's documented as part of the copyright process)? In other words, could I make a menu that *looks* like the other menu, but has been 'clean-roomed' (I hate it when people "verb" things! :-) ? Is this similar to the NEC vs. Intel suit (over the 80x86 instruction set, I believe)? If it is the screen image, how does this relate to non-copyright-ability of fonts? Dave Smythe dsmythe@cup.portal.com