Thanks for the comments. Obviously, I don't agree with most of them, but I'll address just a few points:
- I'm well aware of the Xerox Star and of the origins of StarOffice, thanks. Have you actually looked at its GUI? It bears less resemblance to any modern one than there is between, say, RISC OS and Mac OS X. OpenOffice may just be an MS Office clone, but the important points are:
 MS specifically identified it as infringing.
 It's the only major Free office suite for Linux; AbiWord/Gnumeric or KOffice don't really qualify or compare yet. They're much smaller, simpler and less mature.
 OpenOffice gives a Linux desktop round-trip MS Office file compatibility. This is a very important tick in the features list; in fact, it's a crucial one.
- Xfce did indeed start as a clone of CDE but it's diverged far from it now and is now very GNOME like in, for example, its Xubuntu incarnation. E.g., see this article:
It's hardly taking the MS position. I'm a well-documented anti-MS advocate and advocate of Free software; that article was researched, written and submitted on an Ubuntu machine, the same one I'm using now. It's my main computer.
However, MS has a very strong case. Look & Feel suits have been won by major companies before and they could be again. Far too many people are attacking me for saying this than actually trying to understand my arguments and address them. My hope was to promote a bit of self-examination by the Free software community, so it could make some changes to reduce the risk of MS actually taking legal action.