[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       kde-devel
Subject:    Re: High performance liquid screenshots
From:       Eric Laffoon <sequitur () easystreet ! com>
Date:       2001-06-10 22:37:11
[Download RAW message or body]

On Sunday 10 June 2001 02:52 pm, Rob Kaper wrote:

> On Sun, Jun 10, 2001 at 11:47:41PM +0200, Richard Stevens wrote:
> > what about all the other styles? What about e.g. W2K. It really looks a
> > lot like w2k and I never heard a discussion about copyrights on that one.
>
> Microsoft never bullied someone about using their colours and look-n-feel.
> Apple did.
>
> Rob

Mosfet has stated that the issues Apple has had recently regarded the use of 
names and icons. I am not well versed in all the specifics but I remember a 
time possibly before Mosfet's time where Apple did bring suit against MS 
regarding look and feel. In fact there were several look and feel law suits. 
Generally they are near impossible to win... (but a company does not have to 
win to get the desired result)

Uwe makes some valid points as does Andreas. However we are looking at things 
in ideals. Ideally and in the truest legal sense KDE is a non entity against 
whom you cannot really bring suit... but this is not an ideal world. I'll 
share a story a friend of mine in the medical business told me once. He knew 
someone who was, like him, rebuilding lab equipment. However this guy's 
fledgling company was rebuilding it with improvements that made it better 
than OEM and demand was catching on. One morning he woke up (in Seattle) to 
find two NY lawyers at his door. They told him they were going to sue him 
over this. He told them they had no case... they told him that didn't matter 
because be the time he got done paying his legal bills he'd be destitute.

The moral of the story? Mosfet and Uwe are probably right... and I'd like to 
agree with them and back them... but as a practical matter it might be a good 
idea to do the following.

1) Make some review (find on line documentation) of Apple's recent agressions.
2) Have a page on line somewhere to document this and that care was taken to 
address these concerns.
3) If we procede include docs disclaiming that some concerns were addressed 
and the conclusions were drawn that there was no viable legal issue.

What this would do is this:
1) Clear up the repeated concerns expressed here with a link to go to.
2) Provide documentation should a frivolous lawsuit from Apple arise that we 
did in fact take precautions *not* to violate any copyright, etc...
3) Provide an indemnification for KDE as an organization should any 
difficulties arise with a frivolous lawsuit from Apple against a distro. It 
would be clear that we believed there was no viable legal issue... but that 
we had still provided docs explaining this should Apple wish to use the law 
as a harrasing weapon.

That is my opinion. I'm sure Daniel may not be wild about it and he may be 
right but what I have learned is that it is the appearance of impropriety to 
avoid because so often perceptions trump reality. It seems to me that KDE has 
an excellent reputation and it would be good to be sure it is not wrongly and 
adversely affected. I'm sure there are others who would help with this and I 
know many of us are eager to run the style (and personally feel like Uwe ;).

Looking forward to it...

-- 
Eric Laffoon                    sequitur@kde.org
A member of the Quanta+ Web development team
http://quanta.sourceforge.net
 
>> Visit http://master.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/kde-devel#unsub to unsubscribe <<

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]