Talk:Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Borland Int'l, Inc.

I will be improving this article within the next few days as part of the IP WikiProject. Mfinifter (talk) 17:49, 25 September 2009 (UTC)

Issue still open?
"the 4-4 decision reached by the court, combined with the lack of a written opinion, has led many lawyers to believe that this issue addressed in Lotus is still open."

Huh? There is a written opinion. It's the one the appeals court wrote, and the Supreme Court affirmed it. Who says the issue is still open? Gazpacho 08:23, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

Is Octave vs. Matlab a good example?
I found this Wikipedia article when trying to understand how come GNU Octave can imitate the syntax, behaviour and 'look and feel' of the commercial MATLAB (and openly admit doing so). I guess this case is the answer, but I'd be happy if someone knowledgeable confirms that... If so, it could be a prime example to write under the "Impact" section in the article. Omer B \ עומר ב (talk) 15:23, 30 August 2013 (UTC)
 * This court case is only relevant in the United States. GNU Octave probably needs to respect the laws of many other countries in addition to US laws, or else a large number of people wouldn't be able to use the software. --Stefan2 (talk) 18:14, 30 August 2013 (UTC)

External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Lotus Development Corp. v. Borland International, Inc.. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
 * Added archive https://archive.is/20070714104754/http://www.gesmer.com/publications/article.php?ID=103 to http://www.gesmer.com/publications/article.php?ID=103

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot  (Report bug) 17:08, 6 January 2018 (UTC)