Paperback Software
 | This article has multiple issues. Please help improve it or discuss these issues on the talk page. (Learn how and when to remove these template messages)
|
| Company type | Limited |
|---|---|
| Industry | Software Engineering |
| Founder | Adam Osborne |
| Fate | Dissolved |
| Headquarters |
Paperback Software International Ltd. was a software company founded in the 1980s by Adam Osborne to manufacture discount software such as spreadsheet (VP-Planner), database (VP-Info) and information management (VP-Expert) software. The company was found guilty by a United States court of copyright violation for copying the appearance and menu system of Lotus 1-2-3 in its competing spreadsheet program, even though they did use different computer code.[1][2][3][4] The loss of this lawsuit was the main cause for the foundering of the company and paved the way for future copyright law on computer software.[citation needed]
Not only was VP Planner cheaper, it was regarded by some as better.[5] Adam Osborne's US Paperback Software business folded following lengthy litigation with Lotus Software.[6] The litigation began in 1987, when Lotus initially won a copyright claim in 1990 against Paperback Software.[7] Lotus sued Borland over the latter’s Quattro Pro spreadsheet[8][9] but, after six years of litigation, lost the lawsuit. The court ruled that it is not copyright infringement to use the Lotus interface as a subset, but, by then, Paperback Software had folded, and Lotus 1-2-3 had faced intense competition from Microsoft Excel.
VP-Info remains in use and continues to be available for download from public software archives, and through the Wayback Machine. VP-Info was revised and updated and re-published by SubRosa Corporation as the Shark database management application.[10][circular reference]
References
- ^ bsobel (January 19, 2015). "Lotus Development Corp. v. Paperback Software International". H2O. H2O. Retrieved May 29, 2016.
- ^ Gerard J. Lewis (1991). "COMMENT: LOTUS DEVELOPMENT CORP. V. PAPERBACK SOFTWARE INTERNATIONAL: BROAD COPYRIGHT PROTECTION FOR USER INTERFACES IGNORES THE SOFTWARE INDUSTRY'S TREND TOWARD STANDARDIZATION". LexisNexis. LexisNexis. Retrieved May 29, 2016.
- ^ Brian Johnson. "An Analysis of the Copyrightability of the "Look and Feel" of a Computer Program: Lotus v. Paperback Software" (PDF). The Ohio State University Law Review. Retrieved May 29, 2016.
- ^ Pamela Samuelson (1992). "Computer Programs, User Interfaces, and Section 102(b) of the Copyright Act of 1976: A Critique of Lotus v Paperback". Duke Law. Duke Law. Retrieved May 29, 2016.
- ^ InfoWorld VP Planner Product Review.
- ^ Russo, J. and J. Nafziger. "Software 'Look and Feel' Protection in the 1990s"
- ^ Lotus Dev. Corp. v. Paperback Software Int'l, 740 F. Supp. 37 (D. Mass. 1990)
- ^ "Action in Lotus's Lawsuit".
- ^ "LOTUS DEVELOPMENT CORP. v. BORLAND INTERNATIONAL INC., 49 F.3d 807 (1st Cir. 1995)". Cornell Law. Retrieved May 29, 2016. [failed verification]
- ^ VP-Info
 | This article about an IT-related or software-related company or corporation is a stub. You can help Wikipedia by expanding it. |