🚀 go-pugleaf

amanda@visix.com (Amanda Walker) writes:
 
>Correct.  This is, in fact, the reason Visix makes money at the moment
> :).  You seem to be assuming that the Macintosh interface is the only
>way to present a desktop metaphor.  I don't agree whatsoever.  I don't
>even think it's the best way, although it's one of the best currently
>on the market.
>
>Now, Apple's ad campaigns and PR may try to make this identification,
>but that certainly doesn't mean you have to buy into it, any more than
>you have to buy into the idea that Subarus are the only cars that can
>drive around brick walls :).
 
Amanda, you are completely right about the above.  Apple doesn't have a
monopoly on desktop style genius and the Mac desktop isn't the end-all
desktop metaphor.  Subarus aren't the only cars that drive around brick
walls (although they might have the best "brick wall" metaphor!)  :)
 
The GNU guys probably *could* whip up a better desktop idea, but that's
not the point.  It's not just about the Apple desktop.  In fact, it's not
really about desktops at all.  The issue is software similarity.
 
You know the old idea about technology advancing faster than our ability
to handle it.  Well, it seems likely that technology has done this at 
least as far as legalities are concerned.  Old ideas about property
rights are being stretched to fit entities that can be completely fluid,
mutatable, and infinitely duplicated.  Companies (and their employees!)
who stand to profit from such interpretation quickly fall in line with 
this approach....and naturally so, because this is the nature of
companies.  
 
Lotus would like to be able to prevent the copyrighting of any software
which used commands similar to Lotus products.  Apple would like to be
able to do the same with desktops.  They have the right to protect their
interests.  
 
However, it's not as simple as the phrase "look-and-feel" might indicate.
Subarus don't look exactly like Fords, so why should programmers complain
when they aren't allowed to create programs with a similar "look-and-feel"
of already copyrighted products?  What would have happened if Ford had
copyrighted the "steering wheel" metaphor back in the days of the Model-T?
What would happen if they tried to do that now?
 
If Ford had done this in the early days, all other manufacturers would
have had to come up with something completely different.  (Take a minute
to picture alternate ideas -- amusing!)  Since Ford dominated most of the
market and most drivers learned to drive in Ford automobiles, companies
who offered products that *required the user to relearn driving* would 
have lost out.  If Ford went to court to battle for ownership of the
"steering wheel" metaphor now (presumably on the basis of the original
design) and WON (unlikely, unless the people who make the decisions
don't know anything about the innards of autos), all other manufacturers
would have to scrap their current designs or pay possibly outlandish
royalties to Ford.  Companies that redesigned the car "user interface"
would lose out in the end because of the massive installed Ford userbase
that doesn't want to relearn driving...no matter how much better the
competitors' designs may be!
 
I know plenty of people who refuse to give up Display Write Assistant on
their MS-DOS machines no matter what juicy alternative is offered because
it would mean relearning every command.  It is possible for the GNU guys
(or anyone else) to write a faster word processor with DWA-style commands
and even include lots of nifty features from the juicy alternatives, but
what's the use if you are not legally allowed to distribute it?  Though
one's pride-and-joy program could be released to the public domain, 
consider the agony of having DWA's manufacturers picking it up, changing it
slightly, and then selling it for profit.  (No slight intended for DWA
programmers, it's just an example...)
 
If Apple, Lotus, and the like win precedent-setting court cases over
software similarity, then (as RMS pointed out) the GNU project is doomed.
Copylefting will be out the window and everyone not out for blood and
money will be stuck reinventing wheels.  (Steering wheels?)  In the
end, it will be the users who suffer most.
 
This is, as I understand it, the FSF position on the matter.  
 
             -Jason Asbahr
              jasona@sugar.hackercorp.com
              jasona@nuchat.sccsi.com
--