Yeah check out Pirated Sites

Posted by: on January 21, 2003 08:15 PM

---

 

I think it depends on exactly what they "copy". If it's an identical copy of a program's interface, then there can be a good case for copyright infringement.

In the past Adobe has sued Macromedia for taking certain interface elements from their software.

Posted by: Charlie Xavier on January 22, 2003 08:04 AM

---

 

How about Apple OS vs. Microsoft OS?

Posted by: Lydia on January 22, 2003 04:36 PM

---

 

In June 1990, a US district court judged ruled that Paperback Software unlawfully duplicated the interface of Lotus Corp's 1-2-3 spreadsheet app. For more see http://www.eff.org/Legal/Cases/Lotus_cases/lotus_v_paperback_decision.paper

I assume by "intellectual property theft" you mean copyright infringement. IANAL, but in your example Blogger would have a strong case, assuming a Web service is considered the same as an standalone application.

Posted by: Mark on January 22, 2003 06:11 PM

---

 

Well suppose some service copied Blogger's interface. What do you call Blogger's interface? Huge chunks of Blogger's interface have in turn been ripped off from other sources. Heck, Blogger ripped off its name from common usage. It's input screen looks a lot like the old Geocities input screen (it also looks a lot like my threads screen, which in turn looks a lot like the old Hotwired threads screen did). Do you say this company copied Blogger's interface, or do you say it copied from others in much the same way Blogger did?

People have to get over this idea. Companies are borrowing from the common pool of ideas all the time. Being the first to steal an idea doesn't mean you get to own it.

Posted by: Stephen Downes on January 25, 2003 05:54 PM

---

 

Users actually prefer fairly standard ways of doing something on a computer. They don't have to think. This was the strength of the Next computer interface (but it had other major weaknesses). Arguments that spring to mind over the years include obviously the "trash can" Apple v Microsoft. Adobe v Quantel arguing about paint techniques and interface (this legal case lasted 8 years but although Quantel were the originators Adobe won). Recently Adobe v Macromedia on tabbed palettes spring to mind - neither company was first. Just like Apple and Xerox really in the early days of GUI. Even MSDOS copied elements of interface from earlier systems. All software builds on the interface concepts of the past and legal definitions of intellectual property with regard to interfaces hamper progress to make life easier for users. Don’t you think?.

Posted by: Mike Lister on January 26, 2003 07:05 AM

---

 

Regarding standards, Blogger's XML-RPC interface is largely a standard among weblog systems. So should Blogger sue Moveable Type and Userland for "stealing" their interface?

No, because the whole point of creating the XML-RPC interface was to foster this sort of interoperation between applications. And when applications can agree on a standard interface users can only benefit. Witness what has happened since weblogs have adopted the Blogger interface (and to a lesser extent, the metaWeblogAPI): numerous third-party tools have been created to address needs that noone knew existed before, largely because users had no idea they could use their new tools in so many different ways.

Interface standardization is always a win-win situation between companies and users. Companies who refuse to adopt standards are admitting their product cannot compete on merit alone.

Posted by: Dave on January 27, 2003 09:57 AM

---