| Andrew |
|
Girl Watcher
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 5082
|
|
Loc: Boston, Mass.
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc.
#397072 - 09/12/23 09:09 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
Re: Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc.
[Re: Andrew]
#397079 - 09/14/23 06:46 PM
|
|
|
And video games have been ripping each other off ever since.
|
|
|
| gregf |
|
Ramtek's Trivia promoter
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 8603
|
|
Loc: southern CA, US
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc.
[Re: Andrew]
#397113 - 09/21/23 09:02 PM
|
|
|
The day when digital images, stored as contents in ROM chips, could be considered copy righted materials as US courts made the ruling that ended the look and feel of similar looking images stored in ROM chips which eventually led to legitimate competing companies having to pay licensing arrangements if wanting to market a similar looking product.
The bootlegging then had to go underground instead of operating like some dubious quasi questionable storefront operation.
|
|
|
|
Re: Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc.
[Re: gregf]
#397127 - 09/24/23 08:11 AM
|
|
|
> The day when digital images, stored as contents in ROM chips, could be considered
> copy righted materials as US courts made the ruling that ended the look and feel of
> similar looking images stored in ROM chips which eventually led to legitimate
> competing companies having to pay licensing arrangements if wanting to market a
> similar looking product.
This is completely false and not at all reflective of how look-and-feel laws apply to games. Stick to ramble-posting about things you at least know anything about.
|
|
|
| gregf |
|
Ramtek's Trivia promoter
|
|
|
|
|
|
Reged: 09/21/03
|
|
Posts: 8603
|
|
Loc: southern CA, US
|
|
|
|
Send PM
|
|
|
Re: Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc.
[Re: MooglyGuy]
#397131 - 09/24/23 11:09 AM
|
|
|
> look-and-feel laws apply to games
I didn’t pay attention if there were court cases where game companies sued each other with look and feel challenges, but one of the more notable ‘look and feel’ US legal court cases was Lotus suing the company marketing VP Planner spreadsheet software back in mid 1980s in which Lotus won the court case. Too bad VisiCalc didn’t go after Lotus because VisiCalc was really the first spreadsheet software for IBM CP/M and DOS back when IBM was entering the personal computer market.
|
|
|
|
Re: Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc.
[Re: gregf]
#397133 - 09/24/23 01:01 PM
|
|
|
> Too bad VisiCalc didn’t go after Lotus because VisiCalc was really the first spreadsheet software for IBM CP/M and DOS back when IBM was entering the personal computer market.
Seriously, just stop. You’re making it worse for yourself.
There’s no such thing as “IBM CP/M” – DOS got its initial success by being the CP/M clone that IBM chose to license for the PC.
VisiCalc was originally released for Apple II computers, not CP/M or DOS. VisiCalc remained dominant on 8-bit computers in the face of competitors like SuperCalc and Multiplan. However the DOS version was really just a port of the 8-bit version and didn’t take full advantage of the PC’s memory and display capabilities. Lotus 1-2-3 effectively killed VisiCalc overnight by being designed to make the most of the PC architecture.
Lotus didn’t win the case over VP-Planner against Paperback Software. In the end, Paperback Software won, but were overwhelmed by the cost of defending themselves in court. (VP-Planner Plus also changed to menu layout to be less like Lotus 1-2-3, in much the same way that the MOS 6502 changed the pinout to be less like the 6800 than the original 6501 to appease Motorola.)
|
|
|
Index 
Threaded 
Atari, Inc. v. Amusement World, Inc.
Reply
[Re: 
