3 ms·
One note: Copyright law is a bit broader than the blog thinks. It's entirely possible to create a derivative work even though the assets and code are 100% newly
by enjo 17y ago
One note: Copyright law is a bit broader than the blog thinks. It's entirely possible to create a derivative work even though the assets and code are 100% newly created.
That said, this is clearly not an infringing case. While the functionality is largely similar (although never really the same), the actual execution seems to be hugely different to me. Apple clearly just wants to avoid litigation.
- Sapient 17y agoI am not American, so I need to ask - why would Apple be worried about litigation? I don't see how a widget shop can be sued for selling a product when there is a dispute between two widget manufacturers.
- BearOfNH 17y agoBecause apparently they (Apple) took sides by ejecting one manufacturer. This might even be a conspiracy. And more generally, because here in America there is little downside risk in filing a lawsuit.
- Sapient 17y agoThanks, but as I understand it, the reason they ejected one of the apps was because they were possibly afraid of getting sued - which seems strange to me.
- Mz 17y agoApple clearly just wants to avoid litigation. I'm no lawyer, but there is another side to the litigation issue: What happens if Apple is deemed to be creating a de facto monopoly for some company? We have laws against stuff like that too.
- stcredzero 17y agoI know someone who sued Microsoft because they didn't list his Excel add-on in one of their catalogs. It competed with MS Money. I have no idea how that went, though.
- Mz 17y agoMicrosoft did get taken to court for their business practices, in a much bigger way than what you are talking about.