Aqua-Soft ForumsElppa has interfered in aqua-emulation again. Mr. Aqua has been forced to stop developing iCal and AddressBook under those names. It really sucks, those were some great Apps. 
End Of Ical And Addressbook!
Yeah I agree!!!!! 
<_
yeah, for real. i'd be good with AquaCal and iAddress... 
Why do we need syncro etc, if we can just use our regular e-mail, address, bookmark programs? We wanted iCal and Addressbook because they were emulations of apple software, whereas the savanna application suite very well may not be. Now there is reason for the existence of the Savanna suite, when it has nothing to do with aqua emulation, its just another free-ware suite. <_< <_< <_< PS: WTF happened to the system preferences app, I have it and it can only chnage the wallpaper???
How can apple copyright ADDRESS BOOK, thats just ridiculous. Id say change it anyway, just so he doesnt get in any more trouble, but sheesh. Address book is clearly DESCRIPTIVE. I guess I cant call anything antivirus or CD Player any more, because Norton and Microsoft own those copyrights.
Uh oh, Mozilla has an adress book, they better go running.
Originally posted by nrzero@Mar 28 2003, 11:01 AMPS: WTF happened to the system preferences app, I have it and it can only chnage the wallpaper???
I made that app. The last few months have been really hectic for me and i havent had a chance to work on it. I hope to be able to resume development shortly
My version usually gets messed-up with the window and sometimes it freezes (you cannot drag it, and it will not close, picture drag&drop has not worked for me yet, got v 0.8 & v 0.9 and v 1.00 looks for IAPPCONTROLS.OCX not found)
How can apple copyright ADDRESS BOOK
You are right. The word or name is probably not copyrighted since they are a common language word, but the look of the application is. This is why I always say, use a different metal look or change the look slightly .
By the way Address Book is probably not copyrighted but Addressbuk or AddressBook might be.
Apple could only copyright that if they were the first to make a product called address book, because otherwise you could claim you have intelectual rights to the name. Believe me, its a very sticky situation to copyright commonly used terms.
My understanding is that copyright means you are creating something that is unique and has value. Forgetting the second criteria, there is nothing unique about the name address book since it is a common English word. If they were to get copyright protection to address book every person in the U.S. who said pass me the address book or I'll write it on the address book would be in violation of the law since only Apple has legal usage to such word. The situation would be ridiculous. This is why you cannot copyright common words. You can copyright the application but not the name.
A logo saying Address Book may be copyrighted because it is more than the words. It would entail the font, the color, the shape.
As an example McDonald sued a mom & pop restaurant in Scotland because the name of their store was McDonald. The hamburger company lost eventhough the U.S. may have issued copyright protection to the name, because it is a common name especially in Scotland.
McDonald's Hamburgers may be copyrighted and enforceable because now it is tying a name to a specific product and the combination may be unique enough.
1. If you were the first one to ever publish the name, you could claim control over it, even if everyone uses it now, but you'd have to prove you were the first.
2. You can get restricted copyrights that allows you to control the descriptive name in a commercial setting, but not in a personal way. Or you could only control it in a couple states, it wouldnt be a federal trademark.
3. A logo containing a descriptive name can be copyrighted, but you can only stop people from using the logo, not the words.
4. A trademark doesnt have to have value, it just has to be unique. It you saying you came up with this idea first.
Something really cool, if that Mcdonald store in scotland opened first, and they were using that name consistantly (didnt abandon it) they would have legal right over that name and the trademark would be transfered to their name. Cool huh.
Damn that sucks, I was missing those two in my aqua files folder.
Originally posted by nrzero@Mar 28 2003, 11:01 AMPS: WTF happened to the system preferences app, I have it and it can only chnage the wallpaper???
I made that app. The last few months have been really hectic for me and i havent had a chance to work on it. I hope to be able to resume development shortly
Lazy question ... but is there a url available to get it ? 
Originally posted by contrasutra@Mar 29 2003, 02:49 AMApple could only copyright that if they were the first to make a product called address book, because otherwise you could claim you have intelectual rights to the name. Believe me, its a very sticky situation to copyright commonly used terms.
I read somewhere that Apple was putting a copyright on the Trash icon!
Of course Apple can copyright THEIR trash icon. But nothing stops you or anybody else to buid another one. All of us know that there are thousands of even better looking icons than Apple's.
But they cannot put a copyright mark on a brushed alluminum background, or even on the stripes background used on this site.
The gel think is not their exclusive thing either.
So let's keep this in mind when looking for new apps.
And I think that this community does have something to offer that is at least as nice as Appple's stuff, without being a perfect clone.
We can do better than Apple !
Okay, there seems to be a level of confusion here regarding the terms copyright, trademark and patent.
A name is highly unlikely to be copyrighted, most likely it will be registered as a Trademark; copyright can be defined as "the exclusive right, granted by law for a certain term of years, to make, and otherwise to control, a literary, musical, dramatic or artistic work, or a computer program. Copyright protects the material form an author gives to their original work". In the case of the iCal and Addressbook apps, Apple have most likely objected to the fact that these apps are clearly derivative of their own copyrighted apps, if not in how the programs were written, then certainly in their appearance. If Apple have objected to the use of the names, then that would be covered by the relevent Trademarks they may have on those names, although it is not feasible that they could Trademark the name "Addressbook", as it is far too generic a term.
As for the Trash can, Apple have indeed Patented the Trash Can: a Patent applies to "intellectual property", and by definition a patent on the intellectual property concerning the Trash Can is nothing more than Apple having the right to control the use of the "Trash Can" found in their operating system.