(1) Whelan vs. Jaslow case.
The fact that Ms. Whelan spending tremendous time of studying Jaslow's program considers plagiarism in which revising other's output and claimed to be their property. The context by norms is said to be morally bad in a fact that Ms. Whelan has an intension and will to pattern other program and claimed as their customized property.
(2) Computer Associates vs. Altai
As for me, Altai is also did not infringed Computer Associates and is innocent in a sense that Altai did not intentionally pattern the Computer Associates property. I saw Altai did not motivated to object of aversion that misfortunate Computer Associates by intend. This is in contrast to the case of number one.
As for me, Apple should win the case. I might have no idea about the case's detail but I have these two arguments in my mind. First, in favor of Microsoft, the GUI technology should not be owned with a copyright in a fact that the development of the GUI will not be limited to one company. Second, in contrast, since the copyright was granted, Apple has the privilege to utilize that GUI setting and pattern exists only for Apple.
Basing the fact, the court is unethical. It deprives Apple to use the copyright property which was granted. As a result, Apple loses the opportunity to exercise its property right in selling their product at it's intend cost.
(4) Lotus 1-2-3 vs. Paperback and Mosaic
The court is fair and as to ethics. As expected of owning a copyright, Lotus should enjoy its property.
Finally, I would like to comment that court ruling is based on 'good will' or written laws. The computer ethics is subjected to unleash its boundary.
UP Open University
Master in Information System
IS201 Computer Ethics