holbrook@apollo.HP.COM (Alan R. Holbrook) (03/09/91)
I've been following the thread on Apple's suit vs (MicroSoft/HP)
and lamenting how my dear ol' alma mater appears to have gotten
it stuck to them (us) in the courts when suddenly, via internal
e-mail, our corporate pr dept distributes the following.
So, who's version is the right one...?
Apple's Motion for Copyright Validity Denied
Issues at stake in the lawsuit filed March 17, 1988, by
Apple Computer Inc. against Microsoft Corporation and
HP for alleged copyright infringement (related to Microsoft (R)
Windows 2.03 and the HP NewWave software environment) continue
to shrink in the latest court ruling. On March 6, Judge Vaughn
Walker filed papers in San Francisco at the U.S. District Court,
Northern District of California, which:
o confirmed rejection of Apple's fundamental contention that the
total "look and feel" of the Macintosh graphical user interface is
protected by copyright;
o denied Apple's motion that the court declare its copyrights
valid; and
o further narrowed the number of items still at issue for HP.
(Remaining items are trivial. For example, Apple claims
copyright protection for the ability to center the name of an icon.
HP points out that words can only be positioned left, right or
center, so Apple is not entitled to "own" one of those
presentations.)
Judge Walker asked the parties to meet some time in the next 45 days
to prepare for a status conference. HP is telling the press:
"Hewlett-Packard is especially pleased that the court rejected
Apple's fundamental contention that the total "look and feel" of the
Macintosh graphical user interface is protected by copyright.
"We are pleased that the court has further narrowed the issues,
which already were quite narrow after the last round of motions in
August 1990.
"There appears to be very little left of Apple's case, and we are
confident that we can dispose of the few remaining issues. HP
does not infringe any protectable expression of Apple's works.
"The prior rulings are untouched, and we still are permitted to use
everything that was licensed to HP from Microsoft, and that is the
bulk of the visual displays Apple claims are similar.
"Further, we will go forward to show the limited scope of Apple's
copyrights and that HP does not infringe them.
"We are pleased that Apple's motion for copyright validity was
denied."
Judge Walker is the third judge to handle this case. He succeeds
William W. Schwarzer, who was named to a post in Washington, D.C.,
and has taken a leave of absence from the bench. Schwarzer in
turn replaced Judge Robert A. Aguilar.
Alan Holbrook
holbrook@apollo.hp.com
No .sig, I just post on impulse.