This is Boycott-the-Beatles???-(was-Re:-Boycott-68040-upgrades-that-include in view mode; [Up]
Date: Sun 07-Nov-1990 20:38:40 From: galanter@casbah.acns.nwu.edu (Philip Galanter) Subject: Re: Boycott the Beatles??? (was Re: Boycott 68040 upgrades that include In article <1990Nov6.011007.8569@midway.uchicago.edu> gft_robert@gsbacd.uchicago.edu writes: >Gee, I wonder if all you anti-Lotus people are going to stop listening to your >Beatle's albums too? > >Yep, the Beatles, a.k.a. Apple Corps, are suing Apple Computer over copyright >infringment with the name Apple. Yep, apparently Mr. Jobs signed a secret >agreement with the Fab Four that Apple could use the Apple name as long as they >don't get involved with music. Apple Corps maintain that such Apple produces >such as a MIDI interface, sound chips for the Macs, and the Apple CD ROM reader >violate this agreement. > >Now they want Apple to either stop their "music-making" or change their name. >Now whatever you think of Apple (and remember, it was Steve who was in charge >at that time), you have to admit that this is fairly bogus. Either no one -- ...and details >( * BTW, there is a big :-> :-> :-> implied here. *) >Robert This Apple Corps vrs. Apple Computer Inc. dispute is about trademarks, not copyrights, (or patents, or trade secrets). All of these are distinct types of protection that computer folks should learn about if they are actually interested in debating this kind of thing. (Not to imply that Robert doesn't know the difference...his source of info may have been in error.) And it is not at all bogus... I am not a lawyer, but my understanding is that a given company must actively defend its ownership of a given trademark, or it will be lost in _all_ cases. So the implication is that if Apple Corps lets Apple Computer slide because reasonable people understand the difference and they want to look like nice guys to all the yuppie programmers who seem to be sensitive about this kind of thing this week (and thats why they give away their own code and never charge clients, right :^) )...THEN anyone could come along, record a CD or cassette, and market it under an Apple-like trademark and be more or less immune to legal penalty. While Jobs was around Apple had the good sense to go into a trademark use agreement. Later (before or after Jobs left?) they broke the agreement, forcing Apple Corps hand to sue or lose the Apple trademark to anyone who cares to try to use it. It seems to me that the crux of this issue is an arrogant disrepect for the value of other peoples labor on the part of certain programmers. A good user interface is clearly an expression and of value and as worthy of copyright as any other form of expression. If vendors cannot protect their investment in good interfaces, and good interfaces do cost more to develop than quick bad ones (time being money and all), then they won't bother to make the investment, and the world stays ugly. Phil ============================================================================== Academic Computing & Network Services ~ AppleLink: A42 ~ ~ 627 Dartmouth Place ~ ~Advanced Technology Group Manager ~ galanter@nwu.edu ~ ~ Evanston, IL 60208 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~Northwestern University ~ ~CompuServe: 76474,154 ~ fax: 708-491-4548 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Philip Galanter~ ~ ~ NeXT>gambuh.acns.nwu.edu ~ ph: 708-491-4050 ==============================================================================
These are the contents of the former NiCE NeXT User Group NeXTSTEP/OpenStep software archive, currently hosted by Marcel Waldvogel and Netfuture.ch.