🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <532@lakesys.UUCP> macak@lakesys.UUCP (Jim Macak) writes:
> I certainly am no lawyer, but it seems to me that the folks
> criticizing the Apple lawsuit are generalizing things too much. I
> doubt that the law in cases like this is so non-specific.

The above is a very general statement by itself. In fact, there
are few precedents, and some of them are contradictory.

> The suit notes several patents that Apple
> feels are being infringed upon by the latest version of Windows.  The suit
> refers to earlier agreements, but claims the bounds of those agreements
> regarding Windows have beeen overstepped.

Wrong. The suit lists no patents. Rather, it lists the
registration numbers of a handful of copyrights. It says nothing
about the way in which Apple claims Microsoft and/or HP are
supposedly infringing upon them.

> If we are going to be at all constructive in criticizing and
> discussing this lawsuit, it seems to me we ought to be a bit more
> careful about letting our emotions cloud the issue. Read the
> lawsuit carefully and many of you will see how far off-base your
> messages have been.

With all due respect, your fundamental errors above suggest that
perhaps you should take your own advice.

<rogue>