lotus 1-2-3
Lotus Development Corporation v Borland International, Inc.: Is the Lotus 1-2-3 Menu Command Hierarchy The Lotus 1-2-3 (a computer spreadsheet program) litigation continues to grow exponentially. In the coming months it will wind its way up the steps of the Supreme Court in Washington and present itself to yet another court, this time the highest in the United States. It is rare for copyright issues to be granted certiorari and thus what the Supreme Court has to say on the issue will have far reaching effects for American intellectual property law. Lurking behind this litigation lies the interminable idea-expression dichotomy. The indeterminacy predicted in this area from the copyright master Learned Hand, lingers on. In two separate actions (Lotus Development Corporation v Paperback Software International and Lotus Development Corporation v Borland International Inc) Judge Robert Keeton of the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts has held the Lotus 1-2-3 user interface to be a copyrightable expression encompassed by s 102 (a) of the Copyright Act 1976 (17 U.S.C.). The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit rejected Keeton J's approach in March o
. . .
Some common words found in the essay are:
Copyright Act, Supreme Court, Baker Selden, Keeton J's, Copyrightable Keeton, Judicial Reasoning, Nation Enterprises, Microsoft's Excel, Altai Inc, Law Boudin, menu command, menu command hierarchy, command hierarchy, computer programs, method operation, lotus 123, lotus menu, expression idea, lotus menu command, lotus 1-2-3, electronic spreadsheet, supreme court, lotus development corporation, lotus 1-2-3 user, 1-2-3 user interface,
Approximate Word count = 8841
Approximate Pages = 35 (250 words per page double spaced)
|
 |
