🚀 go-pugleaf

     It all boils down to Apple wanting the most profit it can get from it's
excellent graphics interface (=suing potential competitors.)  This, if I am
not mistaken, is what Xerox wants to do.  I don't know much about the Star
system, or the Berne convention, but it seems Xerox is trying to be a hero
by suing Apple in exchange for what it's done in the courtroom.  Do two
wrongs (according to at least one person here, defending a company's copyright
makes that company "scumbags from hell."  Applicable to Xerox, don't you
think?) make a right?  Xerox is doing the same thing Apple has done.  What's
the damn difference?  It may be a picky thing for Apple to do, but the inter-
face is so easily copiable (OS/2, Windows, etc.) that the lawsuits seem to
be at _least_ partially justified.
     Personally, I doubt Xerox was hurt a bit by the mac.  If they were, they
would have said something before 8 years had past and the Mac had become a
majority of Apple's sales.  The Berne convention doesn't seem to be enough
of a change to warrant $150 million in damages, especially in court, with all
the other questions to boot.  If they wanted to wait this long so that Apple,
in possibly losing its copyright, would fall harder as the saying goes, I 
can't help but see Xerox in a lower position than the coveted "scumbags from
hell."
     It may seem that Apple is doing unjust, picky, whatever you want to call
the lawsuits it's filed, but why does John-not-Apple-Doe come out the hero?
If Apple did do something it shouldn't have, fine, let it come out in the
court proceedings w/ evidence.  I don't like seeing personal opinions being
construed as the reason for $150 million in damages, especially when they're
so different from person to person (Apple-hater to Apple-lover, e.g..)

>In article <1989Dec17.112127.27333@me.toronto.edu> yap@me.utoronto.ca (Davin Yap) writes:
>>gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes:
>>
>>I wouldn't be surprised if all they were after is to punish impudent
>>Apple (<-- scumbags from hell).
>>--
>
>Considering many of us are using ethernet, which comes mostly from Xerox,
>one might say this seems probable. And, quite frankly, Apple deserves it.
>One wonders if the reason they haven't sued Atari and Commodore yet is that
>they consider their offers not being office computer threats. What will then
>happen when Apple again sells machines for home use ( some day ) ?
>
>--
>---
>Per Andersson
>Royal Institute of Technology, Stockholm, Sweden
>perand@admin.kth.se, @nada.kth.se

     Doesn't the Apple II line constitute a computer for home use?  If so, 
then what has happened?  The Mac+ is pretty cheap nowadays.  It's already
going out to the K-12 market, if I hear right...

>One reason Xerox is sueing Apple now may be that Xerox was (fairly) recently
>awarded patents on the Star operating environment.  Patent infringements are
>usually more easily proven than copyright ones.
>
>  Just a thought.
>
>|                 Todd Miller - millert@tramp.Colorado.EDU                  

     Wouldn't a recent patent be a bit worthless in court, considering when
Apple created the Mac, it wan't infringing in a patent?  Why would the Mac
interface be damaging Xerox _only_ after they get a patent?  I can see Apple
loosing copyright rights (I'm no lawyer) but $150 million?  "Just a thought."

>IMHO, I would like to see Apple get roasted by this lawsuit...  Flames to
>/dev/null, please.
>
>--
>>>> Chris Newbold <<< * "If you fool around with a thing for very long you  *
>University of Rochester *                 will screw it up."                *
>Disclaimer: "All warranties expire upon payment of invoice."

     Don't you think we have the right to argue your opinion?

     Sorry for the length, I caught this article late.

InterNet  ->   krb20699@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu      |                 Ken Brownfield
=---------------------------------------------+         Rural Route 4, Box 152
PLATO     ->   ken brownfield/unialum/cerl    |           Champaign, IL, 61820
          ->   brownfield/dialup/cerl         |(home)           (217) 643-7504
=---------------------------------------------+------------------------------=