rcook@grumpy.helios.nd.edu (Robert Kelley Cook) (04/09/91)
I find utterly amazing the fact that apple is still suing Microsoft over Windows 2.0 and implictly 3.0 over stealing certain aspects of "their" (like Xerox didn't invent it) user interface when system 7.0 is coming out with the improvements that are basically lifted from NeXTstep, Motif, Sun's Openwindows, and yes even Windows 3.0 and OS/2. It seems to me that is exceedingly hypocritical and legally intolerable. Robert Kelley Cook U. of Notre Dame --- News Flash System 8.0 is due out "any day now" - Cuppertino folks P.S. The worst part is I actually love the new 3-d look.
jp48+@andrew.cmu.edu (Jonathan Pace) (04/09/91)
Please, this seems to have been beaten to death on this very bullitin board in the last couple of weeks. For the last time (laugh), much of Apple's lawsuit is not so much look-and-feel. Apple claims that Microsoft basically used Apple's coding work to develop Windows. Windows 1 didn't get sued because the code there had been licensed to MS by Apple. Apparently, and I haven't been following too closely, Apple feels (and the courts agree so far) that MS used Apple's unlicensed material in Windows 2. Just trying to kill this before it comes back from the grave, Jon
brandonl@gold.gvg.tek.com (Brandon Lovested) (04/09/91)
In article <1991Apr9.060538.4058@news.nd.edu> rcook@grumpy.helios.nd.edu () writes: > >I find utterly amazing the fact that apple is still suing Microsoft over >Windows 2.0 and implictly 3.0... Why? > [ ... ] >It seems to me that is exceedingly hypocritical and legally intolerable. "Legally intolerable?" What a great phrase! I don't know what it could possibly mean in this day of suing for fun and profit, though. Maybe in the next decade it wil receive the same status as "politically correct." ============================================================================== BRANDON G. LOVESTED ::::=:::==::===:==== FOR EVERY VISION, Software Design Engineer ::::=:::==::===:==== THERE IS AN Grass Valley Group ::::=:::==::===:==== EQUAL AND OPPOSITE brandonl@gold.gvg.tek.com ::::=:::==::===:==== REVISION. ==============================================================================
breidenb@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Oliver Breidenbach) (04/10/91)
hi folx, the most recent lawsuit Apple vs. Microsoft must be near the end by now... Does anyone now, what it led to? I hope that there will be no similarity to the Ashton Tate case in november(?) where AT lost some of their rights on dBase. Any comments? (Besides flames, of course) Oliver.
mireley@horus.cem.msu.EDU (John Mireley) (04/10/91)
From article <1991Apr9.191351.21621@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE>, by breidenb@Informatik.TU-Muenchen.DE (Oliver Breidenbach): > > hi folx, > > the most recent lawsuit Apple vs. Microsoft must be near the end by now... > Does anyone now, what it led to? > I hope that there will be no similarity to the Ashton Tate case in november(?) > where AT lost some of their rights on dBase. > Any comments? (Besides flames, of course) > > Oliver. It will pave the way for AT&T's lawsuit against everybody for the use of tiled windows which they claim they invented. John Mireley
forbes@sp11.csrd.uiuc.edu (Scott Forbes) (04/12/91)
mireley@horus.cem.msu.EDU (John Mireley) writes: >It will pave the way for AT&T's lawsuit against everybody for the use of >tiled windows which they claim they invented. In that case, expect to see the University of Illinois' lawsuit against... (drum roll)... multitasking!!! Ha ha hahahahahahhh!!! No, really, the legend is that Illinois made this patent way back when the PLATO system was invented. It's utterly unenforceable (of course), but wouldn't that royalty money be nice... -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Scott Forbes forbes@csrd.uiuc.edu Center for Supercomputing Research & Development strustee@ux1.cso.uiuc.edu University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
rsarin@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Raman K. Sarin) (04/12/91)
>No, really, the legend is that Illinois made this patent way back when >the PLATO system was invented. It's utterly unenforceable (of course), >but wouldn't that royalty money be nice... Yeah, but how far back is way back? If it was more than 17 years ( I think ) then the patent expires... -RKS
jbr0@cbnews.att.com (joseph.a.brownlee) (04/12/91)
In article <pdfgycl@rpi.edu> rsarin@aix01.aix.rpi.edu (Raman K. Sarin) writes: >>No, really, the legend is that Illinois made this patent way back when >>the PLATO system was invented. It's utterly unenforceable (of course), >>but wouldn't that royalty money be nice... > > Yeah, but how far back is way back? If it was more than 17 years ( I think ) >then the patent expires... I'm not sure when the patent would have been granted, but the first multi-user PLATO system was developed in the early 1960's. The terminals were the size of a room. It allowed two students to simultaneously run a math lesson. There are several guys from the CERL at the U of Ill. the net; they could provide more details. Anyway, I doubt the patent would still be valid. Just an ooooold PLATO "author"... (brownlee / music / cerl). -- - _ Joe Brownlee, Analysts International Corporation @ AT&T Bell Labs /_\ @ / ` 471 E Broad St, Suite 1610, Columbus, Ohio 43215 (614) 860-7461 / \ | \_, E-mail: jbr@cblph.att.com Who pays attention to what _I_ say? "Scotty, we need warp drive in 3 minutes or we're all dead!" --- James T. Kirk