🚀 go-pugleaf

Tim Burnett:
   2. The issue before the courts has only to do with the contract
   between Apple and Microsoft. There was a cross license (Apple got
   Applesoft Basic for a few more years, and Bill got to write
   windows). Apple claims that Microsoft went beyond that contract.

But Apple claims that Microsoft copied their work.  I've yet to see
anything that says that Microsoft had a contract with Apple which
_prevented_ Microsoft from copying Apple's work.  In fact, the
contract explicitly _allows_ Microsoft to copy some things from Apple.

You're saying that HP is a co-defendant in a case because Microsoft
had a contract that prevents Apple's stuff from being copied?

I think you're not seeing the forest for the trees...

   IMHO, Apple feels that the 3+ years they spent designing the
   original interface and 7+ years maintaining it gives them the right
   to protect the work. I agree.  But I believe they only have a right
   to protect the "gestalt".

And I believe they only have the right to protect their
implementation.  I also believe that Apple's time is not the only time
in the universe...

Unfortunately, I don't have a real good idea what the court is going
to decide.  There's a lot of mud in these waters.
   
   ... the FSF boycott is simply silly.  It has made no dent in
   Apple's sales (witness the 750,000 mac classics that will be sold
   in 1991).

It is not necessary to "make a dent" in Apple's sales -- just give
Apple's competitors an advantage, and help them exceed Apple's
production.

Raul Rockwell