🚀 go-pugleaf

In article <31OCT199101462431@minnie.me.udel.edu>, johnston@minnie.me.udel.edu
(Bill Johnston) writes:

> It is often argued by LPF/FSF apologists that the fact that Macintosh
> was developed before the legal concept of "user interface" copyright
> was established proves that such guarantees are not necessary to 
> ensure the continued innovation in the computer industry.
>
> This begs the question.  Of course it is true that the UI concept
> had yet to be established in 1980-84 when the Mac was developed!
> The Macintosh _introduced_ the concept of a computer user-interface,
> and Apple was fought tooth and nail by competitors who are now
> fighting for the right to introduce similar products.

Baloney, there have been UI's as long as there have been computers.  Every
computer language and OS is a UI.  Apple did not even develop the GUI. The
most that can be claimed for Apple is that they popularized one particular
GUI which seems to be dumbed down to about the right level for a large
market.

But before Apple, no one ever thought that a UI was protectable by any
means.  They weren't "intellectual property" of any sort.

> Another issue that is conveniently ignored by the GNU apologists 
> -- who are quick to rightly point out that "independent invention"
> of algorithms is a common for programmers -- is that out-and-out
> copying is far more common in the software industry than it is
> for other commercial products.  

What?  You mean copying like all Fortran compilers compiling the same
language?  I should hope so!  The less vendor-specific garbage we all
have to deal with the better.

> Witness the demise of the company that introduced "Visi-Calc".

Are you asserting that Visi-Calc should have owned the whole idea of
a spreadsheet, that there should be a choice of exactly one spreadsheet
for us to choose from, that there should never be any improvements?
That's a great vision of progress in computing!

Maybe ENIAC or whatever should be the only computer anyone is allowed
to use either.  All of the rest of them are rip-offs, right?  They
should all be put out of business.  No?

> This was a company that introduced a concept that changed the world 
> -- that changed the way we live and work.  They were briefly rewarded 
> with commercial success as businesses snapped up the new Apple II's 
> (remember Apple?) to run this incredible new business tool, only to 
> be swamped by the combination of IBM, who copied Apple's invention 
> of the personal computer,

Or is it just that you believe that Apple invented the "personal computer"
and we should all have to use Apple II's.  Let's ban all the rest.  It's
only fair, right?  Is that what you are trying to say?

> and Lotus, who copied Visi-Calc and added insult to injury by claiming
> the right to sue anyone who did the same to them.

Wow!  Something we can agree on.  Of course, LPF is boycotting Lotus too,
for exactly this reason.

I guess you're not a complete lunatic :-)

-- 
Charles Geyer
School of Statistics
University of Minnesota
charlie@umnstat.stat.umn.edu