America 1982-Chapter 206 - 75: Judgment_2
Jon Meyer stared at Dan Bricklin, speaking deliberately, "Witness, as the head of a software company, how long do you think it takes to develop software with spreadsheet and document functionalities? After borrowing or plagiarizing from other similar software, how much time can be saved? I need you to answer this from a professional standpoint."
"From a functionality implementation perspective, a computer science-trained programmer can independently develop it within a month. VisiCalc, the software I independently developed, only took two months. Generally speaking, for software with straightforward functionalities that don’t require integration or additional extensions, yes, a month is sufficient. As for your second question, I believe... you should know the answer, Attorney. Lotus 1-2-3 took two months to discreetly complete its adaptation from VisiCalc."
Jon Meyer immediately turned to the judge, "Your Honor, I believe the expert witness’s testimony is biased, and I request..."
"Your Honor, the expert witness is merely stating the facts, and the opposing counsel’s question is leading and deceptive. The second question clearly deviates from professional matters," Delia Case instantly stood up and countered to the judge.
The judge simply nodded numbly, "I agree with the defendant’s attorney. Plaintiff’s attorney, you only need to ask questions to confirm the witness’s expertise."
"I suspect the defendant has an ulterior motive in inviting Mr. Bricklin as an expert witness, as Mr. Bricklin’s Software Arts Company has disputes with the Lotus Corporation. Under these circumstances, Mr. Bricklin couldn’t possibly provide the court with a professional and impartial opinion," Jon Meyer turned around, insisted while looking at Dan Bricklin.
Dan Bricklin looked down at his hands, then glanced at Mitch Kapor and Jonathan Sachs in the plaintiff’s row, before gently speaking to the presiding judge:
"Before my spreadsheet software was installed on the Apple II, the sales volume of that computer was thirty-five thousand units a year. The following year, with VisiCalc installed, the sales soared to two hundred and twenty thousand units. I created the category of spreadsheet software, the very first of its kind in this world. I am here because of my expertise, not personal grievances, Your Honor."
"Plaintiff’s attorney, do you have any questions for Mr. Bricklin regarding his professional perspective?" The judge nodded, asking Jon Meyer.
At this moment, Mitch Kapor whispered something to his lawyer beside him, and soon Jon Meyer received his employer’s message, spreading his hands, "I have no further questions, Your Honor."
"Mr. Bricklin, from a professional standpoint, how do you view the OSS software involved in this case and the Lotus 1-2-3 software?" The judge gestured for Dan Bricklin to speak.
Dan Bricklin’s gaze shifted complexly between the plaintiff and defendant benches, before withdrawing it back and speaking to the judge frankly:
"Professionally speaking, the software industry cannot operate like traditional industries, where each company builds up patent barriers and isolates themselves on solitary islands. For the software industry to develop, it requires an open ecological environment. Frankly, if we talk in terms of patents and copyrights, the software industry shouldn’t even exist. Only a few companies such as IBM, Xerox, Texas Instruments, and so on that have been established for decades would survive, because they laid the foundation of the computer industry. Most players today are merely continuing to climb atop the shoulders of giants. I’m not saying that the software industry doesn’t need patent protection; I just don’t wish to see patent abuse as in other industries. The similarity of software interfaces leading to infringement claims is something I can’t comprehend. Software interfaces shouldn’t be patented. Users are used to seeing spreadsheets on the top of the screen, and function menus at the bottom, or spreadsheets on the left, and menus on the right. Is there any technical content in this? No, code can be easily adjusted to make interfaces completely different. Why not adjust? It’s just convention so that users don’t have to relearn, it’s all for the convenience of software users," Dan Bricklin explained:
"It’s like America has so many TV channels, when viewers turn on different news programs, they all find that the newscasters sit on the left and a small picture appears on the right. So why doesn’t NBC sue ABC for copying their news program format? Because they all know that such seating adjustments are meaningless to news programs, Your Honor."
The judge looked at the documents in front of him and asked, "The court has received a copy of the OSS software sent by Actor Corporation to the Lotus Corporation, and we found some identical code in the software. Is it common for similar software to have identical code?"
"It’s not common, if there is no special reason, two different software would not have identical code, because code is written independently by developers. Normally, they wouldn’t be the same; even if there is plagiarism, the code itself wouldn’t be plagiarized, only the functionalities of similar software might be copied. For example, software A has a useful feature like cell commenting that software B lacks. The company behind B can purchase a copy of software A, experience the feature, and then write their own code to implement the same function in software B. This means even though the two functions look exactly the same and their implementation methods might be the same using the same programming languages and compilers, the coding process is entirely different. The court simply needs to review the development logs and source code to clarify," Dan Bricklin stated with assurance.
