IBM monotheism

[Eric Rosenbloom]

MalignD at aol.com wrote:
> 
> << Stole, licensed -- Again, this was all a kind of aside in my post, so I
> didn't take care to be academically accurate, but whatever term you use, it
> wasn't their idea but they were the ones got rich off it, without much
> acknowledgement (if any) of the true originator. >>
> 
> I know this continues to be beside the point you think you're making, but
> calling a licensing agreement "stealing" is inaccuracy beyond the quibblingly
> academic.
> 
> Xerox owned the technology and passed on its development.

As I already said: however the technology was obtained, Apple came to
own them only in the sense of legal property, not as intellectual originator.

BusinessTech -- "your one-stop source for the finest insight and
analysis on the booming world of business, technology and strategy" --
has a feature in which they use the word "absconded":

"The real irony came when Apple sued Microsoft over the theft of the
"look and feel" of the very elements it had absconded with from Jobs's
PARC visits and corporate personnel raids."

<http://businesstech.com/feature/btinxight9703.html>

As if it mattered at all,
Eric R



**********************************************************************
This email and any files transmitted with it are confidential and
intended solely for the use of the individual or entity to whom they
are addressed. If you have received this email in error please notify
the system manager.

This footnote also confirms that this email message has been swept by
MIMEsweeper for the presence of computer viruses.

www.mimesweeper.com
**********************************************************************