🚀 go-pugleaf

u-dmfloy%albion.utah.edu@cs.utah.edu (Daniel M Floyd) writes:

}I can't help but wonder if the companies tied up in litigation are fresh
}out of original ideas.  Yes, it is harder to be creative.  Yes, it would
}be easier to rest on what's been done. Although the tactic may be
}successful short term, if the lead in a race attempts to rest by trying
}to force others not to pass, that lead's probably going to loose the race.

}I don't have an answer to the software copyright/patent problem. But
}I do think companies are wasting valuable resources on litigation.  If
}companies like Lotus and Apple think they can eliminate competition
}through litigation, they are in trouble. ...

Funny that you should chide the plaintiffs in these legal things as
being the not-creative-enough folk.  

You can turn your creativity argument around: it is pretty audacious to
come by and take [er, uh, borrow, er, uh, share] _my_ stuff, and then
have the audacity to argue that *I* should then go off and create
something new [presumably so you can 'share' that, too].  Why don't
*YOU* use some of this creativity and come up with your own 'original
ideas' and leave mine alone?  In that case there would be no
litigation, LOTS of new, creative, innovative products out in the
market: if my product is so unworthy, then why not drive mine out of
the market by coming out with a better one, instead of just by giving
away copies of my stuff.

  /Bernie\